"Star Wars: The Force Awakens"

A long time ago, in a galaxy far,far away..............

Those immortal words have come to symbolise more than just another film franchise. For so many movie fans around the World, they have to come to mean something so very special, and if we are being honest we are really talking about episodes 4 - 6. There is a real bond between the three leads from the original "Star Wars" film. And whilst episodes 1 - 3 had their successes, the one thing they could never recapture was the magical chemistry between Ford, Hamill & Fisher. We followed these wonderful characters across the stars, and have loved being alongside them on the journey that they have gone.

Like "Star Trek", this film series has some very die hard fans, and whilst I would not call myself one of them, I have to say that I was squealing with delight when this latest film was announced, and even more so when it was confirmed that the original leads would be returning to reprise their roles, something they had not done for over 30 years.

I wanted to go into this film knowing as little as possible, so I only watched the trailers at the Cinema, and read no reviews, blogs,  nothing that could give away any clues as to what the film is about.
So what is the story?
Time has passed since we last saw our intrepid star travellers and the events of "Return of the Jedi". Luke Skywalker has vanished, but given his immense Jedi powers, the Galaxy and his wife are all trying to find him. We begin on the planet Jakku, where a map of Luke's possible location is hidden within a droid, and that droid must be put into the right hands. Also seeking the droid are members of the First Order, the new force of darkness, one of their elite being Kylo Ren, who is keen to follow in the footsteps of his great mentor, Darth Vader. But he certainly has a secret or two.
The droid ends up in the hands of Scavenger Rey, she searches the wastelands of Jakku, finding space wreckage and cashing in for food. Rey reluctantly teams up with Finn, a former Storm Trooper who became averse to the methods that the First Order were adopting. Toegther they manage to escape those looking for the droid, in an all too familiar space ship.
During the next chapter of the film we are reunited with our old friends Han and Leia, and it provides us with some wonderful moments in the film. Han and Chewie bickering like an old married couple, Han providing some great quips, and tenderness when Han and Leia reminisce about the past.
But this reunion could be short-lived due to the First Order having constructed the Star Killer, a huge space station which makes the Death Star look tiny in comparison. They need to get the map and find Luke, and find a way to put the Star Killer out of action..............

Some of the key things that were wrong with the episodes 1 -3 have clearly been addressed. It is a good case of back to basics. One could quite easily say that this is a carbon copy of "Star Wars: A New Hope", and why not? Why change a winning formula?
Having the original characters back is a huge boost to the movie, I think, like many others, I never expected Harrison Ford to be climbing on board the Millennium Falcon ever again. It is like seeing old family friends whom you have not seen in a long time. Yes it heart warming to see them back together again.
But what is pleasing to report is that Daisy Ridley as Rey and John Boyega as Finn are truly excellent in their respective roles. Effectively they are the new guard, taking over  the mantle of the Star Wars legend, and it is a tough act to follow, but they do so brilliantly. The future is in very good hands.
There is great support too, from Adam Driver, who frankly I was not familiar with, who is outstanding as Kylo Ren, to great actors like Oscar Isaac, Domhnall Gleason to acting royalty like Max Von Sydow. And a special mention to BB-8, who will surely become a huge favourite with younger audience members, and probably even some older ones.

So we have great characters, brilliantly acted, and a compelling story....but how is the film visually?
It is breath-taking. The photography, visual and special effects all combine on a huge canvas to make this, I think its fair to say, the most visually beautiful film in the whole series to date. It does not fall into the trap of putting the action right in your face, it paints wide strokes allowing the viewer to savour all the beauty and the action.

Director J.J. Abrams has taken a franchise, and brought back the magic that so many remember from the 1970's. We can now forget about Jar Jar bloody Binks, and the lacklustre receiving of "The Phantom Menace". I can possibly forgive him now for "Star Trek Into Darkness", then again, maybe not. But he has certainly done a first class job in the Directors Chair.

Disney had a lot riding on the success of this film. It is safe to say that they have more than just ticked all the boxes. It continues to keep breaking box office records, and I am sure that there will be many more being broken very soon, and it deserves every bit of the success that it is enjoying.
My only remaining question is how soon can I see it again?  And I am sure that will not be the only repeat viewing.

The Force has most certainly been awakened........9 out of 10

"Spectre"

Was it really that much of a surprise that "Skyfall" became the Box office smash that it did?
The film showed that in a 50 year old franchise, there can still be surprises. The movie did far more than just tick all the boxes. It gave us a compelling, action packed, character driven drama, which went on to be a big Award Winner, and also being the first Bond film to go past the $1 billion mark, and is still the highest grossing film at the UK box office.

So it with little surprise that Producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli (the latter I have had the great fortune to meet)  were keen to reunite the team that made "Skyfall" the huge success it has become.

I have now seen the film a second time, as I felt that after just one viewing, I was unable to do a full and comprehensive review. But now the jury has returned its verdict.....

The film opens in stunning style on the streets of Mexico, during the Day of the Dead festival. Bond complete with skull mask goes after his prey, a mysterious hoodlum called Sciarra. However this mission has not been sanctioned by MI6, so why is Bond going it alone to get Sciarra? He calmly walks the rooftops, as he settles in for the kill. His first attempt fails, and this leads to a dramatic chase which ends inside a helicopter. The cramped conditions give way to a tense fight to the death. Naturally Bond prevails and he has accomplished his mission and has the ring worn by Sciarra, which features an octopus as its design......

Back in London, Bond is in trouble for his one man mission, he finds himself suspended from duty. But it would seem that M is feeling the pressure as there is a new boy on the block, Max Denbigh, whose aim is to combine many of the Worlds Security networks, which would all go through London's new Security home, the Centre for National Security. Denbigh also sees the '00' programme as passed its prime, and is keen to retire it.
Despite being grounded, Bond manages to evade his Superiors and making his way across Europe, through Italy and Rome, and then heading to warmer Countries like Morocco. He is putting together the pieces of a puzzle, which start from his childhood, and the man who looked after him following the death of his parents.
Could it be that his past is beginning to haunt him?  What is this mysterious organisation known as SPECTRE?

Firstly, for any Bond fans, there is a lot that one can relate to from past films. In fact you could be forgiven for thinking that this was the film that was released during the franchises 50th anniversary. The carnival scenes in the opening - "Moonraker". A tense and rough fight on board a train - "From Russia With Love". A clinic above a mountain range - "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", and many more.
"Spectre" has sewn together all the strands that were spun from the first three Daniel Craig Bond films, all coming together under the Spectre organisation. As to who is behind, I could not say.

I had such high hopes for this new Bond film, especially given how much I love "Skyfall" and maybe that is part of the problem. Could any film ever be as good as Bond 23?
Although the premise for "Skyfall" was only revenge, it was so tense and brilliantly acted out, and the pace never slowed, even though it was not wall to wall action.
The same cannot be said for "Spectre" which does wander around quite a bit, seeming to take ages to get to the point. And then when we get there....what is it all for? It is all fine and dandy having a long film, there is just 5 minutes difference in running time between these last two Bond movies, but it felt at times that "Spectre" was dragging its heels.

A few quick moans. Composer Thomas Newman, who did such great work on "Skyfall", returns for "Spectre", and so does a fair amount of his previous score. I can only assume that he was having an off day when scoring this new movie, and so reused his previous tracks. I will say however that one piece that is reused was done so beautifully.
New henchman Hinx is just about two dimensional. A lot was mentioned about Monica Bellucci being the oldest Bond woman, and yet she is barely in the film. And as for Lea Seydoux, I am afraid she just looked pretty and that was about it.
If you are going to get a two time Oscar winner to play your Bond villain, then you give him a part worthy of his immense talent. This was brilliantly illustrated with Javier Bardem. So when you see that Christoph Waltz is playing Frans Oberhauser, you get really excited.....that is until you see the film. Like Dave Bautista as Hinx, I felt that Waltz did not reach his full potential. Anyone who has seen his work, especially his amazing performance in "Inglorious Basterds" will know what I mean.
There is an excellent finale, and I must mention how well Ralph Fiennes has settled into the role of 'M'. Dame Judi Dench would be a tough act to follow, but he is really excellent.

Overall it is a good Bond film, but not got the edge that both "Casino Royale" and especially "Skyfall" had......8 out of 10

"Tomorrowland: A World Beyond"

I have wasted 130 minutes of my life watching this pile of trash, so I am not going to prolong the agony by spending more time than necessary reviewing it.

Dull, boring, at 2 hours 10 minutes, it could have easily, and I do mean easily have had 40 minutes shaved of it, to at least try and minimize the risk of falling asleep, which I did several times, and this was during an IMAX screening !!

Almost certainly guaranteed a place in my list of worst films of the year.....3 out of 10

"San Andreas" - Special Preview Screening

It has been said in these reviews before, but for those who may not know, I am a huge fan of the Disaster movies of the 1970's. Leave me watching a Blu Ray of either "The Towering Inferno" or "Earthquake" and I am a very happy man.

And the latter of those two classics is an apt choice, given this film from Warner Bros. and New Line, as it is a modern take on that classic Earth trembling story.
Back in 1974 we had our lead couple (Charlton Heston & Ava Gardner) on the brink of divorce. A Building Designer (Lorne Greene) looking to add a new addition to the Los Angeles skyline. And at the Seismology Institute, impending disaster is predicted by a top Scientist (Kip Niven) but the warnings go unheeded.

We jump forward 41 years, (Wow has it really been that long), and very little has changed. Our Hero Ray is estranged from his Wife Emma, Ioan Gruffudd is in the process of building the biggest skyscraper in San Francisco, and Paul Giamatti predicts a disaster on an epic level.

So as you can see all the boxes have been ticked. Whenever watching a film of this nature I am always very weary, as I usually expect it to literally be a disaster, as was the case with "2012". But from the opening moments, we see nature at its most devastating. As a series of small but deadly quakes rock both Los Angeles and San Francisco, Ray does all he can to rescue both his estranged Wife and also his daughter Blake. The human element is brilliantly done with this family, and also with Blake in that coming to her moment of need are two young British lads, two Brothers, one of whom is applying for a job in Gruffudd's new Offices.

Understandably the biggest difference between this film and the 1974 classic is the visuals, and oh my word they are truly awesome. But where "2102" got it so wrong, with some ridiculous set pieces, this film has the right level of believability, and also maintaining a high level of suspense. Yes the action does the increase the old heart rate.
Leading the battle against Mother Nature is Dwayne Johnson as Ray, our Hero, and again perfectly played and written. He may look larger than life, but he is not an over the top death defying man of action, he is a credible Helicopter Pilot, just doing all he can to save his family, and Johnson excels in the role. Daddario and Gugino are also really good as the the ladies in his life.
Paul Giamatti adds to the cast with his performance as Seismologist Lawrence, who sees early on in the film what devastation it can cause during a trip to the Hoover Dam. We also have a guest cameo from a certain Songstress.  Hugo Johnstone-Burt and Art Parkinson are totally charming as the two British brothers, in fact Parkinson comes close to stealing the show with a really great performance.

A rousing score comes courtesy of Andrew Lockington, but a tip of the hat to Director Brad Peyton for bringing all the key elements together, and achieving a first class Disaster movie, one of a high standard that we have not seen for some time.
There are going to be both IMAX and 4DX screenings, and I would strongly urge to see the film in this format. With this being a preview screening, it was a traditional screen room, but rest assured come the weekend, I will be seeing it again on the IMAX.

See it...........feel it.................love it......9 out of 10

"Mad Max: Fury Road"

I have to this review by saying that I am not in any way a fan of the original movies. So I suppose it begs the question, why on earth am I watch this new film?

The future, a post apocalyptic desolate wasteland. Pretty much nothing but sand, where very litttle grows. Roaming the sand dunes are gangs of psychotic tribes, driving around in the most bizarre vehicles.
Immortan Joe rules, he controls the people, the supply of water, and rages a constant battle for fuel. Battling all this is Max, a former Police Officer, who has lost his wife and daughter, and now battles his own demons as well.

To answer my original question, when I saw the trailer, I was stunned by the visuals, which looked quite amazing. Also I felt that enough time had passed since having seen the original movies, that it was time to reacquaint myself with Mad Max and the world he is from. It must be 20 years since I last saw a Mad Max film, and I would be quite happy for the same amount of time to pass by before I see, if I see another one.

As a piece of entertainment, I cannot see what there is to be entertained by. The visuals are at times quite remarkable but it is so not enough to warrant 120 minutes of viewing. I just see what the point of the film is, just like the originals. Tom Hardy is a great actor, and is woefully underused. I would say that Charlize Theron has the better role.

The film is as barron as the wasteland that it is set in.............4 out of 10

"The Age of Adaline"

Having watched "Big Game", and a load of tosh, here we have the second film from my double bill, and another load of tosh. And yet it is still a highly enjoyable and entertaining movie.

Adaline was born at the beginning of the 20th Century and given that we are now in the current day, she looks as good now as she did 80 years ago. The reason being is that having been involved in a car accident, she then finds herself being struck by lightning. A remarkable thing happens in that her body stops ageing. To start with this causes very few problems, but as the years start to pass by, it becomes increasingly difficult for her to explain away the fact that she not getting any older. She is a Mother, and now the two are more like Sisters than Mother & Daughter. So she puts a plan into actio, as she has Federal Agents investigating her. She has up move away and start a new life, changing her identity, and leaving her Daughter to carry on her own life. So with that, every 10 years, she brings her current identity to an end, and moves on, to start again.

There are inevitable downsides to this way of life. She misses out on being present during her Daughters latter years, and can never be involved in a long term relationship. She had been close to someone, many years ago, but brought to an end, but things got really heavy.
She is once again getting ready to start another new life, when she meets Ellis. They have a couple of dates but Adaline is determined to move on. But Ellis is equally persistant, and over the course of time she forms quite the attachment to him.

For me. the key as to why the film is so likeable is that the characters are so well written, and equally well played by a great cast, especially main leads Blake Lively and Michiel Huisman. You do care about what happens to them, and those around them,. It is a wonderful quality that Lively has that makes you believe 100% that here is a woman who has lived throughtout the last 100 years or so.
It is also especially nice to see the likes of veterans like Ellen Burstyn (Flemming, Adaline's Daughter) and Harrison Ford (William, Ellis's Father) on screen, and must not forget Kathy Baker who also gives a great performance playing Ellis's mother.

I had a feeling it would be a good film, but like "Big Game", was very surprised how much I enjoyed it. The Mother relationship is at the heart of the movie, as much as the one between Adaline and Ellis. And provides for some moving moments.

Nice to see a mature movie, with strong characters and a great story........7 out of 10

"Big Game"

With no disrespect to Mr. Jackson, I was not expecting a great deal from this movie. In fact I was expecting to be giving it a very low score.  But I like the fact that movies still can surprise one.

US President William Moore is not particularly popular. He may even rival President G.W. Bush for his lack of fans. That being said, he is still heading to Helsinki, for a pre G8 Summit meeting. With him is his trusty Head of Secret Service, who is shortly due to retire due to being hit by a bullet, intended for the President.

Meanwhile, in a small village in Finland, a small group of villagers are congregating for their rites of passage event. This occurs when a boy turns 13. Hunting and fishing are the main pastimes, and even way of life within the village. And turning 13 is the moment that the village send a boy out into the forests, and see if he returns a man. He is sent to test kis skills with bow and arrow, see what the forest offers him, and what he can bring back as a trophy. Though given his size, many of the villagers believe he will fail. He hopes to prove them wrong.

Air Force One is making its way over Finland, and during the journey there is an attack from some nasty looking terrorists who are ground based, and have launched a missile at the Presidents plane. Following usual protocols, the President is evacuated in an escape pod, and Special Agents are not far behind, jumping out with parachutes. The only problem is that there is there is someone on the inside helping the terrorists, and the President will soon find himself alone, in Finland, with little help.
And that little helps in the form of Oskari, and his trusty bown and arrow, though his proficiency at it is somewhat lacking. They must not only tackle the elements but deal with the terrorists.

As it sounds, it is complete tosh, but I have to say I found it highly entertaining. It is one of those films where no brain is required. But what did prove to be the biggest surprise was Onni Tommila, who not only gives a really good performance, but his character is the most engaging and interesting of the film. It is fascinating to see him on screen, and how he plays him, and also the relationship he has with his Father, and how he is perceived by his fellow villagers.
And naturally Mr. Jackson is as pleasing as ever, though with it being a 12A, it is a little short on his usual level of cursing !!
There is also a rather unusual piece of casting regarding Jim Broadbent as a CIA Analyst, and during his role he does the most un-Jim Broadbent-ly thing I have ever witnessed (Did that make sense?)

I know that there have been some damning reviews, but I was pleasantly surprised by this movie, and regard my time at the Cinema reasonably well spent.....................6  out of 10

"Spooks The Greater Good" - Special Preview Screening

For ten glorious years "Spooks" reigned supreme on British Television, ranking as one of the very best shows to come from the BBC, or any other channel for that matter.

Now the spy show gets the big screen treatment, as we see the great Peter Firth back as 'Sir Harry Pearce', head of MI5, trying to prevent an imminent terrorist attack in London.

The film opens with a transported Prisoner being freed, much to the huge embarrassment of MI5. The powers that be are looking for heads to roll, and top of the list is Section D Chief, Sir Harry Pearce. For many he is seen as a relic of the Cold War, and long past his prime, others think that MI5 itself is long overdue for being put out to pasture.
With his beloved organisation in tatters as it picks up the pieces of losing their prized terrorist prisoner, Pearce goes it alone to try and make amends. He knows that key information was given out by someone at the highest authority. So we have an escaped terrorist on the loose, a Traitor walking the corridors of power, and a rogue MI5 Chief on the run.
MI5 Director General Oliver Mace, brilliantly played by Tim McInnerny, knows he needs a suitable Spy to find Pearce, so brings on board decommissioned agent Will Holloway, who has connections with Pearce. So Holloway sets off to bring back the disgraced Chief to account for his actions, and also try and prevent a major terrorist atrocity in the very heart of London.

Anyone who knows me, knows that I am a huge "Spooks" fan, in fact in the run up to this movie release, I have been revisiting the ten series from the BBC. And as a huge fan, it does pain me somewhat to say that the film does not recapture the magic and brilliance of the show. It is good, and it is especially pleasing to see Peter Firth back in his most famous role, and that is always a bonus, but it fell somewhat short of some of the exemplary episodes that we got to enjoy, and this is surprising given that the film is written by Jonathan Brackley and Sam Vincent, who penned the final series of "Spooks", and this tenth season showcased it as its very best.
For a show that seemed to show all that was great about being a Spy, we see very little of it evident here. In fact it would be a case of why not to be a Spy. Given the increased budget for the film, against what was spent on the show, there is little evidence that the boat has been pushed out. For me the show truly exceled with some remarkable end of series cliffhangers, involving some spectacular storylines, and you would think with this movie, they would at least try and get to that level of entertainment or even top it, but sadly no. There are a few tense moments but to especially get the pulse racing.
Yes there are connections to the shows past, with key figures from the last series working alongside Sir Harry, and there is the return of an old friend, and of course I will not reveal who it is here, Top Secret !! But apart from Sir Harry, they are all sidelined for new boy Will Holloway, and there is where some of the problem lies. As much as Kit Harington may be pleasing on the eye, he is not Spooks material. You look at those that have gone before him. Matthew Macfadyen, Rupert Penry Jones, Hermione Norris, Richard Armitage, and I am afraid that he is not in the same league. I don't know whether having the longer hair was due to continuity on "Game of Thrones" but there is a scene where he ties it up at the back, not a good look.

There have certainly been far better episodes of the show than this feature length movie, and if I am truly honest, if the plan is to start a series of movies, then I do not see it getting past this first film. 
When myself and a friend learned of the film, from Peter Firth, a few years ago, we were very excited. Then to see it come to fruition, even more so. But after the journey, it feels like a very different "Spooks" to the one I remember and loved......7 out of 10

"The 87th Annual Academy Awards - My Predictions"

 

Well, it is that time of year again, as all the good and great of the film world descend upon that which we call the 87th Annual Academy Awards. And as ever here are my predictions.

As always, each of the selected categories will have two entries. Who I think will Win, and who I want to see Win.

 

Best Screenplay Written Directly For The Screen

For me it has to be Wes Anderson all the way for his brilliant work on "The Grand Budapest Hotel", but a little part of me would equally love to see "Nightcrawler" win too



Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published 

    
It is a tough to choose who I think will win, as it could easily go to The Imitation Game, but I think The Theory of Everything will bag it. And of course would love to see Whiplash win         


Best Actor In A Supporting Role

J K Simmons all the way. He will soon be adding an Oscar to the many awards he has rightly won for his brilliant performance as Terence Fletcher in the oustanding "Whiplash"







Best Actress In A Supporting Role

Likewise it will be Patricia Arquette adding another award to her cabinet for her work on "Boyhood". Despite my protestations against the film winning Best Picture, she gives a great performance, and it is nice to see her getting some acclaim, as she is a great actress.





Best Actor In A Leading Role

Despite those who think that Michael Keaton will bag the Lead Actor Oscar, I still think Eddie Redmayne will be victorious. Though a little bit of me would love to see Benedict Cumberbatch win for his work as Alan Turing in The Imitation Game


Best Actress In A Lead Role

Despite the film not opening here yet, she has won every major award going, and it is her time. The amazing Julianne Moore is long overdue for an Oscar, after so many great performances, and tonight will be her night





Best Director

In another battle, as Birdman 
Vs Boyhood, I think that Alejandro G. Innaritu will triumph against Richard Linklater. Would be nice to see Wes Anderson again win for The Grand Budapest Hotel


Best Picture

It pains me to say it, but despite those who think that Birdman will make a last minute win (And I hope it does), then I do firmly believe that the over hyped Boyhood will Win Best Picture....for all the wrong reasons. 

So there you have it, and with just 18 minutes to go, I had better go and get ready for the 87th Annual Academy Awards, and best of luck to host Neil Patrick Harris. 

Happy Oscars !!!!

"Jupiter Ascending"

Hmmm...where to begin?
Well first of all, for those who have not read any reviews yet, and seen the slating that this film has been getting, it is one of those movies, where you leave your brain in the foyer, in fact better, leave it at home.

Jupiter is born with no country to call her own, as she is delivered at sea, her Mother a Russian on her way to start a new life in America after her British born husband is murdered in Russia.
Years later and Jupiter and her Mother earn a pittance by doing very menial cleaning. She has very little purpose in life, but she does share her father's love of the stars and astronomy. But whilst she is trying to look at the stars, it would seem that the stars are watching her, and with very keen interest, the main reason for this interest is that Jupiter is a genetic match or reincarnation of the Mother for three siblings, who are locked in a war to gain control of Earth, their Mother being the previous owner of our planet. Their need for the planet is that by killing 100 humans, they get one cannister of a life saving substance, it allows one to live well passed traditional age, with one of the siblings already being in their 14th millenia. So yes, kill 100 Earthlings, and you get a jar of the ultimate Oil of Ulay !!  L'Oreal never went to this much trouble.

So as everyone in the known universe seems to be fighting over getting their hands on Jupiter, thankfully she has someone in her corner, and he comes in the form of Channing Tatum as 'Caine Wise', a kind of protector. And boy doe he look good in leather and with the blond hair. At the end of the day this film is all about the visuals, and whether you are marvelling the excemplary visuals or just perving at Mr. Tatum, it is the main reason for watching, as the story is just pure hokum.

Pretty to look at but that is about all.................4 out of 10

"Inherent Vice"

I have been quoted a saying that watching the trailer for this film was far more fun than watching the whole of the film "Mortdecai" and I still stand by that, however the film was a huge disappointment.

It had so much promise from having seen the trailer on numerous occasions.
'Doc' Sportello is a practicing Dick, or Private Eye to you and I, and he has been hired by his former girlfriend Shasta, who has concerns about her lover, a Billionaire property developer, who may have been kidnapped, indirectly by his wife and her boyfriend. Also investigating a murder is 'Bigfoot Bjornsen', a local Cop cum TV actor, but is the murder connected with the kidnapping? Also what is the connection to a group of Dentists, one of whom is high as a kite?

There are a few laughs in the film. But it has to be said that the plot is maybe a little too multi-layered, and I never thought I would hear myself about a film by Paul T. Anderson, especially being such a huge fan of "Magnolia", and you don't get much more multi layered than that, but there you go.
The period, 1970, has been wonderfully recreated, and there are great performances most notably from Joaquin Phoenix as 'Doc Sportello', who looks like an early 'Wolverine', and also Josh Brolin who excels as 'Bigfoot'. 

Despite all the promise, sadly this film was not for me.........4 out of 10

"Kingsman The Secret Service"

Take a Comic Book co written by Mark Millar, have the book interpreted for the Screen by Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn, and have the same Mr Vaughn sit in the Director's chair, and just like "Kick Ass" you have all the ingredients for a kick arse film.

When a leading World Scientist is kidnapped, it takes a special organisation to investigate and rescue. Here come the Kingsman, a collective of Gentlemen and Ladies, well groomed, well refined, well spoken, but who an also, when required, deal with an agressor, in an ungentlemanly fashion.

However, said missing Scientist is soon once again walking the streets of London, and the Kingsman have lost one of their group. Whilst still trying to uncover what the Scientist is working on and find out why he has been seemingly freed, they must fill the vacancy left by their recently departed colleague.

Each of the elite gentlemen agents gets to assign a protege, someone to mould in their image. Most of the new recruits would not look out of place as students at Eton say.
Elsewhere in a housing estate in London, Gary, or 'Eggsy' as he is known to his mates goes on with his mundane day to day existence, he shares a flat with his Mum and her loathesome boyfriend. After some joyriding he finds himself under arrest. He has a necklace / chain given to him by those he loves, and told to use in an emergency......so 'Galahad' (Firth) receives a phone call and his release is soon forthcoming. 'Galahad' sees this rough young lad as a possible Kingsman candidate and promptly enrols him.
Whilst training is going on, we learn more about what 'Valentine' is upto. He believes that the World has become over populated, and that this will lead to the end of the human race as custodians of Earth. So he sets about a plan of action to heavily reduce the number of inhabitants, seemingly looking like the philanthropist he says he is, but actually a mass murderer on an epic scale, and quite mad.

Cutting to the chase, Valentine and his organisation go to battle against humanity, and its increasing number, and all that stands in the way of his success is the Kingsman.

Whether a fan of comic strip violence, or Bond films, or just out to be entertained, then  you should quite rightly love this movie. It has it all, great screenplay, fun characters, loads of kick ass violence, amd is just a great barrel of laughs.
I am amazed that I have still not seen the film a second time yet, and I must rectify this.
We get to see a small example of Valentine's scheme in action, during what is a memorable head popping sequence.
All the cast are exemplary, from Michael Caine as Kingsman head 'Arthur', to Mark String as a Q type figure 'Merlin'. There is the very good looking Taron Egerton as 'Eggsy' who is a real find, he conveys both the streetwise Eggsy and the gentlemanly Kingsman brilliantly.
Colin Firth however does steal the show as 'Galahad', it is rumoured Firth may have offered Bond, and if so, then this is a worthy chance for us to see what might have been. And the highlight of the film is during a small fracas in an East End pub when he has to tackle a few unruly youths.

Great fun, great cast, great film.................8 out of 10

"American Sniper"

There has been a lot of hoo haa about this movie, ranging from the subject matter, to the wide range of love and loathing for it, to the remarkable performance of the film at the US Box Office.

The film concerns Chris Kyle, a Marine who was an exceptional shot, and has the highest number of kills in US military history. It starts off with his being on duty in Iraq,and having to decide whether to kill two potential life threatening targets, a mother and her young boy. Then we jump back, and get a look at Kyle's earlier life. From being a young child and getting his first feel of a rifle, whilst out hunting with his Father, to then getting into rodeo riding.He is a very ordinary typical American, but when the events of 9/11 occur, he feels he has to do something, and so enlists.

During his number of tours in the Middle East he starts to get quite the reputation, and before long is officially classed as the most lethal sniper in US history.The film examines the effect these tours have on Kyle, both in respect of being of service to his fellow soldiers, but also when he has to make a snap judgment call, that could conceivably end an innocent persons life, if he gets it wrong. But equally he could see his fellow countrymen hurt or killed if he fails to stop someone out to do harm.
There is also the effect that the film has on his relationship with his wife, as each time when he returns home, he understandably becomes more withdrawn, and this does start to take its toll.

We have great performances from the two leads, as ever Bradley Cooper is 100% on top form, as is Sienna Miller playing Kyle's wife. As good a performance as it is, I would question whether it is worthy of an Oscar nomination. And I feel it is this nomination that saw Jake Gyllenhall so cruelly miss out on a nod for his career best work on "Nightcrawler".

The Direction as one would expect is top notch, but what I find most remarkable is that a movie of this level of attention to detail, the amount of big set up scenes and action and it is all undertaken by a man approaching his 85th year.

I have to say that I did not realise how recent the Kyle story was, and more so by the ending of the film, which I did not know about, it made it all the more powerful. In fact because the film highlighted the date, you knew there was going to be something happen, but I expected it to go in a different direction.

At 84, Eastwood still has it......8 out of 10

"Mortdecai"

"Mortdecai" is the 'Austin Powers' of the Art world, I suppose that is the best way I can think of to describe him. There is also a touch of TerryThomas about him, but at least TerryThomas was funny, which is far than can be said for "Mortdecai".

Said fellow is in debt, owing £8 million in back taxes. So when a potential 'lost' painting maybe up for grabs, its all hands on deck, especially as the reverse of the painting could contain the Bank account details leading to a Vault load of Nazi gold and valuables.

Oh the hilarity. NOT. The creator of the trailer should be praised as they have done their job, they made the film look appealing and got me inside. They have earnt their wages. Alas no-one else working on the film has, especially the Writer and Director. The film believes itself to be a comedy but is far from it. I mustered two minor sniggers during the whole 106 minutes, and that seemed to be the same for the other 40 or so people viewing the film at the same time as I.
In fact to put it into context, I laughed more watching the trailer for "Inherent Vice" for the third time.

Some say that Johnny Depp is his way to being the most overpaid actor in Hollywood. Going by the quality of this latest film, I am going to agree.

Stay clear of this dire movie...................3 out of 10

"The Gambler"

What can I say?
I would not bet the house on this film being a hit. I would not even bet the cost of a cinema ticket.

Jim Bennett is a teacher, in a job he finds quite depressing. And to make matters worse, he likes the odd gamble, a little flutter here and there. Unfortunately for him, he is now owing the sum of $260,000, and the people he owes are keen to collect.

There is little to appeal about this movie. The main character is not likeable, and thus why should you care what becomes of him. And that is the biggest downfall of the film. In fact he is a right tosser. When he has the golden opportunity to end his financial woes once and for all, he just makes it worse.

Even with a great cast, and the Writer of "The Departed", it is just painful to watch.

Do yourselves a favour and avoid this movie, that would be my best bet ..........3 out of 10

"Whiplash"

I have been reviewing movies for a little while now, and any readers will possibly be aware that I do not given out the highest score very often, in fact I try and award just one a year, thus making it the Best film of the Year. That may be tricky to do during 2015, and here is why..........

Andrew loves to play the drums, and he clearly has some skill with the said instrument. He is a student at a prestigious Academy, and one day he finds himself being watched by Terence Fletcher, who is one of the Music teachers. During this short meeting he believes that he does very little to impress Fletcher of his talent, but he is proved wrong, when he soon finds himself sat amongst the players that make up the band that Fletcher has assembled. There is a regular Drummer, Carl, so whilst he plays, Andrew sits, watches, and turns the pages of his music sheets for him. But soon enough, Andrew is sat in the hot seat. His first session goes well, and he is rather pleased with himself. Here he is, playing in a band for a tutor he truly admires, and someone he wants to impress, and prove he is worthy to be a part of the band.
Fletcher has a love of music, and a passion for the band he has assembled, attending regular competitions, and he only regards there to be one place, there is no prize for second place in his opinion. He rules over his band with total discipline, but he also get results, truly great music performed at the highest level.
And if Fletcher has an obsession to master the perfect band, then equally Andrew has that same level to be part of it, no matter what the cost. After getting his place in Fletcher's Band he feels cocky, and finally asks the girl who works in the local cinema for a date. Romance blooms, but Andrew soon sees it as a hurdle to what he wishes to achieve.
But soon it becomes clear that the high standards that Fletcher expects come at a price. And is it one that Andrew is willing to pay?  He intimidates the Band members, they truly fear him, barely being able to look him in the eye. He will glady belittle them, play members off against each other, if he thinks there is a chance they it will improve the quality of their playing.
It sounds like pure mental torture but there is physical pain too, as the constant playing and practicing makes their hands bleed. Their sweat and blood literally dripping onto the drums.

Will Andrew become a member of the Award winning Band?  Will the intense pressure cause him to have a breakdown?

J. K. Simmons is one of those actors that when you see his face, you may not automatically recall his name, or remember the last film you saw him in, but he is an actor that you will have almost certainly seen him in something. Rest assured, everyone will remember him after "Whiplash". He gives such an electrifying performance, one of the best I have seen in a long time. Every aspect is spot on, from the look of the character, who even intimidates just by being dressed in black, that lined face, his physique, to the voice, one which commands to be heard, you listen and obey every instruction you are given. When Simmons is on screen you cannot take your eyes off him. It is as good a performance as any I have ever seen.
But like a pair of great bookends, one complimenting the other, there is the dazzling performance from Miles Teller as 'Andrew'. He is profile is increasing having done several crowd pleasing movies, but in "Whiplash" he shows he can really act. As a lover of the Cinema, it gives one just the greatest of joy watching Miles and J. K. on screen together.

I guarantee that if you do not have a love of jazz at the start of the film, then you will by the end. There are some great toe tapping tunes included in the movie. I am already looking into buying the CD soundtrack.

For such a great piece of Cinema, one would expect it to come from someone who has honed their craft but remarkably it comes from a relative newcomer, Damien Chazelle, who has only done a couple of prior movies. He has a real cinematic flair, he has brought together all the key elements of a great movie, (cinematography, editing, writing and performance) so beautifully. I would doubt the likes of Spielberg or Scorsese could improve on this film.

What is especially worthy of note is that the film is not as much of an open book as one would expect, there are a few surprises in store, which just adds to the brilliance.

I cannot praise the film enough, especially Chazelle, Teller and Simmons. This mighty trio have created a truly outstanding piece of Cinema. It does not get much better than this......10 out of 10

"Into The Woods"

Some of the most beloved Fairytale characters all brought together in one story....

Based on the Broadway smash hit play, written by Stephen Sondheim.......

An All star cast............

All these factors and yet it is still dire, on an epic scale.
I don't plan to waste time going into detail but I found the songs tedious and the lyrics seems to be forced, ill fitting. The story was merely average, and not that engaging. Visually it was passable, but even the likes of my movie favourite Meryl Streep, who looked amazing after the transformation, could not save this movie.
And please will someone let Chris Pine know that he is as wooden as the forest he was trying to protect.

A big disappointment...................3 out of 10

"Birdman"

Putting on a stage production can be very stressful. But when you are the lead actor, writer and Director, it can be very hard work indeed.
But what makes it even worse for Riggin Thompson, is that he feels he has something to prove. Once he was top of the movie World, as a major Super-Hero star, long before the likes of 'Iron Man' ruled the sky. He was at the top of his game, and loved by millions. Now he is a nobody, washed up, but with this play he has the chance to show that he is an actor and not just a movie star.

He is adapting a Raymond Carver work for his play, but all is not well. One of his fellow actors is not exactly Laurence Olivier, but fate steps in when an accident means he cannot continue with the play, and a replacement is sought, But was it an accident or are there other forces at play?
A replacement is forthcoming in the shape of Critic and fan favourite Mike Shiner. But the initial elation at having such a crowd pleasing name join the cast is soon short lived. For Mike is a true method actor. Plus has designs on rewriting the script and designs on Riggin's daughter. There is a quite hilarious preview scene when Mike objects heavily to the lack of authenticity with the beverages on stage.

In the opening scene we find Riggin hovering above the floor of his dressing room. Is it some elaborate gimic? Or does the former Superhero have skills that really are super? He constantly hears the thoughts of his alter-ego. Have these words of wisdom unhinged his mind? There are times when he seems to have a Jedi mind trick skill, moving objects at random, was he responsible for the falling light fitting?

Whether Riggin really does have super powers, whether it is in his mind, or whether it is a dream, I think can safely be said is left to the viewers to decide, but maybe the closing scenes give a definitive answer....who knows.
Hovering about at the back of house provides the cinematographer a real challenge, with many continuous shots, some are really astounding. Not since "The West Wing" has so much corridor weaving been seen on screen.
But the main battle for Thompson is proving that he is an actor and not a movie star. Anyone can be a movie star, but it takes someone with talent to be an actor, and threading the boards is where many thespians say that they really perform their true craft. But he may have a war of words to comtend with, as attending the first night will 'Tabitha Dickinson', a Critic who is determined to sink his play on opening night, and she warns Thompson of this, before she has seen a single scene

Some have likened the story material to Keaton's own life, having once played the Caped Crusader, and never really having hit the big time since, despite many varied roles over the many years since playing 'Bruce Wayne'. But rest assured he gives a great performance as 'Riggin Thompson', and is worthy of all the plaudits he is getting, and could be a real contender for Oscar.
There is great support too from the likes of Naomi Watts, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone, Zach Galifinakis and most notably Edward Norton as the actor to make Lee Strasberg proud !! 

Well written, brilliantly acted and a real delight to watch................8 out of 10

"Foxcatcher"

As the true stories keep coming, here is one with ambition, power and Channing Tatum in a leotard.
Now if that doesn't get them queueing round the multiplexes then nothing will.

So leotards aside, I wish, what he have here is Mark Schultz, an Olmypic gold medal Wrestler, but for him he constantly spends life in the shadow of his older Brother David. But fortune smiles on Mark when he is given the opportunity of a lifetime to train with the famous Foxcatcher  team, and create an Olympic winning team that will take the US to the very top during the 1988 Games. Du Pont clearly sees great potential in Schultz, and makes him his new golden boy. All goes well for a while, but when standards start to slide, Du Pont has not alternative but to bring in David, much to Mark's annoyance.
Du Pont is a fascinating character, very complex, private, but determined, and having a great love for his country. He dotes on his Mother, and the fact that she finds wrestling a low sport must not sit well with him. One does wonder as to what is the attracion of the sport for Du Pont, and more so what is the attraction to Schultz?  There has been comment of an alleged closer relationship between Coach and Trainer.
Paranoia is a key part in Du Pont's downfall, but it is a shock when the act that causes his arrest occurs. There is no real hint of what was to come, and no reason as why he did what he did. 
But it is a dream part, so subtle, so quiet, so unnerving. And one has to question why the part was offered to a Comedy actor like Steve Carell. It is a very bizarre piece of casting, but one that pays off big time. He does give a career transformative performance, brilliantly played out, and he deserves every single Award nomination he receives. It would be nice to see him win as it is equally deserved.
Channing Tatum and Mark Ruffalo are equally excellent as the Schulz Brothers. Tatum especially is given the chance to show the versatile actor that he is, as opposed to starring in crowd pleasing movies.

I remember that when "The Iron Lady" opened, many said that it had amazing performances but was just an average film. I disagree as I thought it was outstanding, but that thought occured to me with regard to "Foxcatcher". It is worth watching for the remarkable acting on show from the three leads, but the film itself is average. I susepct I may have wanted more, or expected more of a revelation regarding the Du Pont Character.

Had the film been as good as the acting then it would have been close to a perfect film, however it still scores a worthwile 8 out of 10....

"Unbroken"

One of the finest, if not the finest young actor of his generation is back on screen, in his third high profile film in the past 365 days.

Here Jack O' Connell plays Louis Zamperini, and we are introduced to his story.
We start off with his as a Bombadier on board a plane during World War II. There is a quite taut air battle sequence, which is really well executed. And during this sequence, he remembers back to past times, when he was younger, a tearaway, and an embarrassment to his loving parents.
His older brother takes him under his wing, and gets him to share his passion for running. And before he knows it young Louis is running for State and then for Country in the Olympics.
We are then back on board the plane, as the Crew receive a new assignement. To try and locate a plane and its missing crew. The only downside is that because of the need for planes in battle, they are given a clapped out museum piece but at least it is still airworthy. For now.....

Sure enough the stresses of being in the air tells on the plane, and soon enough it ditches in the Ocean, so another Crew is lost at sea.
Louis is one of three survivors. They battle against hunger, the elements, and also attack from sharks. To survive so long at sea is quite remarkable but two of them did manage to survive until they were rescued. Unfortunately for them the rescue came from the Japanese, and they promptly transported to a Prisoner of War camp. So from one ordeal to an even more horrific one.
The officer in charge of the camp seems determined to make life unbearable for Louis. But one thing that his Brother taught him was that if he could take it, then he could make it, and seems to be his lesson throughout all that he is dealt.

I think that it is fair to say that if the subject material were not based on a true story then one would have a hard time believing what Louis endures.

Derby born actor Jack O'Connell is certainly riding high at the moment, and rightly so. He is very justly getting the kind of reviews that an actor of his rich talent deserves, and remarkable more so for such a young age. Time and time again he amazes and wows on screen, after such great work on films like "Eden Lake", "Starred Up" and "71", he now brings to life the story of a true survivor.
There is excellent Direction from Angelina Jolie, she has seamlessly moved from in front of to behind the camera.
The film has attracted criticism, I think mainly people saying that it is trying to be an Oscar film, one that will attract the attention of the Academy. I think it is unjust, as it is a worthy film to watch.

A compelling story, wonderfully told.............8 out of 10

"The Theory of Everything"

From the moment I first saw rhe trailer, it was obvious that the performance by Eddie Redmayne would be an Award winner, and sure enough he has already bagged himself a Golden Globe and rightly so. But more on that later.

This remarkable film looks at the lives of Jane and Stephen Hawking, a couple of students who meet, and fall in love. Clearly very happy together, all is going well. But then everything changes when Stephen is affected by motor neurone  disease. The prognosis is not good, as he is told that his life expectancy is just a mere two years. It is a lot for someone, anyone to take in, and he inevitably gets angry, and draws within himself. But it is the love of his wife Jane, that holds strong, as she stands by his side in this battle. Both are determined that two years will not be the end.

Many will no doubt know the genius of Professor Hawking, but not necessarily this look into his early life, and the relationship that he had with his first wife. It really was a Herculean battle that they both undertook, and it is a real testament to their strength and love.
It is remarkable what they went through, as there were many knock on effects of the diagnosis, dealing with pneumonia, and the throat operation meaning he would potentially never talk again. All these obstacles he has tackled and won, and continues to win.

There are excellent performances from both leads as the Hawkings. It is nice to see a rising actress like Felicity Jones in a high profile role, getting to show her talent.
As for Mr. Redmayne, what can one say that will be shouted out by many a film critic across the Globe. It really is an Award winning performance, on every level. We share his delight at meeting Jane, falling in love, we share his pain as he discovers his medical condition, and marvel as he and Jane, side by side, take on all that it encompasses. A great performance, and quite uniquely there is a very strong resemblance too.
Nice support from the likes of Harry Lloyd and especially David Thewlis.

A remarkable story, and a remarkable film, which gets 2015 off to the best of starts......9 out of 10

"2014 - This Year In Film"

Well another cinematic year draws to a close. And it gives us the opportunity to reflect on the best and the worst from the past 365 days.

As ever as becoming the norm with Cinema, biopics once again were a huge part of the year, starting off with two good movies, namely "The Railway Man" and "12 Years a Slave", the latter going on to win Best Picture at The Oscars, and despite being an unpopular opinion, I felt there were more deserving films.

Marvel had a better year. There was once a time when a Marvel was almost like an event as they maybe released a film or two every year. Now it is almost like there is one every few months, and I think it is a case of saturation at times, but this year they did excel themselves.
"Captain America: The Winter Soldier" was a great sequel featuring Steve Rogers, and it was quickly followed by "The Amazing Spiderman 2", which I thought was one of the best Marvel films for some time. "X-Men: Days of Future Past" was enjoyable enough, and certainly visually stunning, and then saving the best for last we had "Guardians of the Galaxy" whih was one of the top box office films of year, worldwide.

The mature film stars flourished this year, with Douglas, Kline, Freeman and De Niro having fun in "Last Vegas" and Mr. Neeson still playing the hard man in both "Non Stop" and "A Walk Among the Tombstones", although the latter remains a pretty awful film.
You probably cannot get more mature than the collective known as Monty Python, who were on our Cinema screens in a one off live performance, which raised many laughs.

September was a bad month in that there were three major turkeys viewed in just over a one week period, see below for more details.

All in all though it has been a pretty poor year again. It has only been saved from being a complete disaster by some remarkable films in the closing few months, such greats like "Pride", "The Imitation Game", "Mr. Turner", "Nightcrawler" and "'71".

The Award for Promising so much, and failing to deliver goes to - "Interstellar" and "The Expendables 3"

 

Here is a selection of films which share the Award for Worst Film of The Year    -

But now time for some praise.

The Award for Best British Talent goes
to Jack O' Connell, who gave amazing performances in both "Starred Up" and also "'71", and is currently being seen in "Unbroken"

The Harry H. Corbett Award for Comedy by a Dramatic actor goes to Ralph Fiennes for his hysterically funny work on "The Grand Budapest Hotel"

The Kleenex Award for Best Weepie of 

the  Year goes to "The Book Thief" 

It is a tough call for Best Actor, and I very seldom do this but we have a tie. The winners for Lead Actor are:

Jake Gyllenhaal for "Nightcrawler" and Benedict Cumberbatch for "The Imitation Game".

 
Before I get to Best Actress, I have to mention there were several outstanding performances by actresses in a Supporting Role.

We have on the left the amazing Dorothy Atkinson who brought both many emotions to her performance as 'Hannah' in "Mr. Turner". In the centre there is the excellent Rene Russo who was great as TV executive 'Nina' in "Nightcrawler". And on the right there is Imelda Staunton who was hysterically funny in "Pride"...all worthy winners in my opinion.


It is a great shame but there were very few outstanding Lead Actress Performances during 2014, and I suspect it is the age old problem of poor writing for female characters.

But there can be only one winner, and it is:

 

 

 Rosamund Pike for her first class work on psychological thriller "Gone Girl" 

As for Best Picture, well there were several movies that would on any other year have been worthy winners, but there can be only one movie crowned best of 2014...............