Crazy, Stupid, Love

http://crazystupidlove.warnerbros.com/index.html

I'm going to shock you all now by revealing yet another of my crushes, Ryan Gosling. I have no doubt that any girls reading this will not be surprised by this admission. And any guys reading will probably mumble something about 'pretty boy' or 'six pack'. Truth is Ryan is very pretty and boy does he have a fine six pack. But that's not what this review is about. The other truth is that while I openly admit to having a crush on Mr Gosling, rather than this being a recent thing owing to his prettiness or good abs, this is a crush that stems back to The Notebook and a certain scene in the rain that I someday hope to re-enact.

Admission made, it will be a further lack of surprise that I wanted to see this movie, along with Mr Gosling's other new film, Drive (which I will hopefully be seeing/reviewing over the weekend). What was surprising - to me at least - was the amount of recommendations I had about this film before I'd had chance to see it.

The movie opens on a not-so-romantic dinner for married couple Cal (Steve Carell) and Emily (Julianne Moore). He wants desert and she wants a divorce. Soon after Emily admits to having an affair with her co-worker and Cal moves out of the family home. Cal's life is on a downward spiral until he meets Jacob (Ryan Gosling), a self confessed ladies man who decides to mentor Cal and turn his life around. Cal has soon learnt all of the tricks Jacob has to show and is a huge hit with the ladies. Meanwhile Jacob finds the one thing he wasn't looking for, a girl who could be 'the one'.

Okay, so no surprises so far right? You ready for one? I didn't love Crazy, Stupid, Love half as much as I thought I would. I partially think the endless recommendations ruined any chance I had of loving this film as they raised the bar too high. I don't deny that it's a film that somewhat pushes the boundaries of the romantic comedy genre, and I don't deny that the performances are all great. I just felt like too much time was spent on the Cal/Emily story and not enough on Jacob and Hannah (Emma Stone).

I am a huge fan of Emma Stone (see, it's not all about Ryan!) and she was almost as underused in this as she was in Friends With Benefits, but at least in that movie there was an excuse for her underuse as her role was only a cameo. Her comic timing is impeccable (as witnessed in Easy A, seriously, if you haven't seen it please go and rent/buy it now!) and she should have been featured a LOT more than she was. Kevin Bacon is also woefully underused.

The other thing I felt went against this film was the trailer. As you will see below, the trailer clearly puts the emphasis on the relationship between the younger couple and this simply isn't the case with the film. Don't get me wrong, the Cal/Emily story is well told and acted as I said above, it's just not what I was there for. It was the more depressing of the two storylines and for me, could have been better balanced by having more of the Jacob/Hannah story.

I don't want to put people off as it is a good film. Just don't expect it to be hilarious because it's not, though it has got funny moments. And don't expect it to tug at your heart strings because it's not all that touching, though it has moments of clarity. Do expect to see a slightly more realistic take on marriage and a slightly less realistic take on guys who sleep around. 

It's one of the better films in a month of distinctly average rom-coms. 8* out of 10.

*It's more of a 7.8 but as I've only ever given whole or .5 scores I'm rounding up. It only just gets an 8!

Viewing Date - 28th September 2011

UK Release Date - 23rd September 2011

Cast Overview:

Steve Carell ~ Cal Weaver

Ryan Gosling ~ Jacob Palmer

Julianne Moore ~ Emily Weaver

Emma Stone ~ Hannah

Analeigh Tipton ~ Jessica

Jonah Bobo ~ Robbie Weaver

Marisa Tomei ~ Kate

John Carroll Lynch ~ Bernie Riley

Kevin Bacon ~ David Lindhagen

Liza Lapira ~ Liz

Director(s) ~ Glenn Ficarra and John Requa

Writer ~ Dan Fogelman

Aliens

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090605/

I was recently told that I focus too much on my 'experience' in my reviews and not enough on the film. I personally don't agree with this as this is first and foremost a blog, and as such I feel a certain amount of personal experience is necessary. But I always welcome your views on the subject and point out that my comments box is always open.

Having said that, I will now advise the person who felt my ramblings were too much, to look away now, as this one is going to be very personal indeed! I have been very lucky to see Aliens this week, at the same cinema I saw The Terminator at last week, The Duke Of York's Picturehouse in Brighton. Aliens puts my total number of visits to this cinema at four. A paltry amount when you consider what a champion I am of the independent cinema in London, The Prince Charles Cinema. You will probably have noticed that my Terminator review didn't exactly go into detail about the cinema itself, the way I do when I visit The PCC. This is because I don't particularly rate The Duke Of York's. Each time I have been I have had a less than perfect cinematic experience. Rude and unhelpful staff on the first two visits and then a poor quality film and lack of attention to detail for The Terminator. Aliens is the first film I have REALLY enjoyed there. And it may be enough for me to start championing them too.

For those unfamiliar with James Cameron's 1986 follow up to Ridley Scott's Alien, allow me to enlighten you. In Alien, the crew of the mining ship The Nostromo, land on unchartered planet LV-426 after receiving what they presume is an SOS. One crewman is attacked on the planet's surface and brought back aboard with an organism attached to his face. We later learn this was implanting him with an alien life that later bursts out of him, killing him instantly. The alien created soon grows into a creature that wipes out the crew within 24 hours, leaving Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) as the only survivor. She sets The Nostromo to self destruct and escapes on the ships shuttle. In Aliens, Ripley's shuttle is picked up by a passing salvage team. She wakes from hypersleep to discover she had been floating in space for 57 years. She is brought before the company board who need answers as to what happened to The Nostromo and it's crew. Despite Ripley's detailed reports, they do not believe what happened on LV-426 and inform Ripley that the planet has since been colonised by terraformers. The company soon eats their words however, when they lose contact with the colony.  Ripley is asked to go back to LV-426 to aid an investigation into what happened to the colonists. At first reluctant to go, Ripley's frequent nightmares about the alien encourage her to face her demons. She agrees to accompany the group of marines sent down to the planet to find the colonists. There they discover an army of aliens that have been bred using more than 100 colonists as human hosts. And one little girl who has managed to survive to tell the tale. 

The showing of Aliens was sold out and the atmosphere was electric. Fans cheered at the start of the grainy original reel of the film. Favourite lines (mostly by Hudson "No way man!") were met with an auditorium of laughter and those less familiar with the film jumped at all the scary moments. I could not have asked for a better way to experience one of my all time favourite horrors.

The film shown was the theatrical cut, and although the reel was not in perfect condition (understandably, due to age), the grainy picture quality and intermittent sound just added to the tension already imbued in the film. Cameron's Aliens is a very different beast to the first Alien film, with hundreds more alien creatures and a higher human body count than before. But it also has more heart. The relationship between Newt and Ripley adding another dimension to the out and out horror of the first film. It's also a lot faster paced and funnier.

I recently watched the first Alien at home and was again forced to admit that although it has it's merits, I just don't love it. But while watching Aliens all I could think was that there is literally nothing I would change about it. This leaves me with the conclusion that Aliens has to receive my third perfect 10 of the year. 10 out of 10.

Interesting fact: Each marine's first name is the same as the actor who played them. The only exception is Cpl. Dwayne Hicks. We see "Frost R." who was played by Ricco Ross, so the character's full name is Pvt. Ricco Frost. The other characters are: Pvt. William Hudson, Pvt. Jenette Vasquez, Lt. William Gorman, Sgt. Al Apone, Pvt. Mark Drake, Cpl. Collette Ferro, Pvt. Daniel Spunkmeyer, Cpl. Cynthia Dietrich, Pvt. Tip/Tim Crowe, and Pvt. Trevor Wierzbowski.

Viewing Date - 29th September 2011

Original UK Release Date - 29th August 1986

Cast Overview:

Sigourney Weaver ~ Ellen Ripley

Michael Biehn ~ Cpl Dwayne Hicks

Carrie Henn ~ Rebecca 'Newt' Jorden

Paul Reiser ~ Carter Burke

Lance Henriksen ~ Bishop

Bill Paxton ~ Pvt Hudson

Jenette Goldstein ~ Pvt Vasquez

William Hope ~ Lt Gorman

Al Matthews ~ Sgt Apone

Mark Rolston ~ Pvt Drake

Director ~ James Cameron

Writer(s) ~ James Cameron (Screenplay and Story), David Giler (Story), Walter Hill (Story), Dan O'Bannon (Characters) and Ronald Shusett (Characters).

The Terminator

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088247/

I was recently looking at upcoming film listings for independent cinema's in the south. I was looking for film that hasn't been released yet but which I hope one of the smaller cinema's might get soon. In doing so I came across two classic films being shown at my local independent picture house, the Duke of Yorks. The first was The Terminator. The second, well you'll find out what that is when I review it next week! 

Having never seen The Terminator on the big screen, and after recently re-watching Terminator Salvation and wanting to see the first Terminator again, it was an opportunity I couldn't pass up.

For those not familiar with the film, it's about Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton), an ordinary 80s waitress with an unspectacular life. That is until a Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) is sent back from the future to kill her before she can give birth to a baby not yet conceived. A son that will one day become the future leader of a resistance movement against the machines that have taken over. Unbeknown to The Terminator, or to Sarah, her future son has sent back a soldier, Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn), to protect her.

As I mentioned above, I recently re-watched Terminator Salvation and doing so gave me a real hankering to watch the original Terminator film, just to see if it worked as well when you watched them back to back. It also occurred to me that unlike other films which have had several sequels, you can watch the Terminator films in a loop, owing to the element of Kyle Reese being sent back in time. Now that I've done this I would recommend it to others as it does put an interesting spin on the whole Terminator series. It also shows how much homework the people involved in Terminator Salvation did to blend it with the first film. 

Right, now that I've jabbered on about Salvation I will get on with talking about the film that started the whole series off, The Terminator. It's an undisputed classic in my eyes. I want to say Arnie's best role, is that going too far? He barely has any dialogue but he is so imposing and genuinely frightening in his portrayal of a killing machine who will not stop. Michael Biehn was perfectly cast as the lovestruck soldier sent back in time to protect a woman he admires deeply, but has never met. And finally Linda Hamilton in the role that has defined her career. 

It's true that some of the effects have not stood the test of time but overall the film has. The performances have, and that's what draws you in and keeps you there. Having said that, some of the Terminator effects at the end, although given away by the green screen, were revolutionary at the time and still look great. The direction is slick and the story, which continues through spin off shows and sequels more than 20 years later, still feels unique and appealing.

For anyone who's not seen it, and indeed to anyone who has but maybe not watched it for a while, get on LoveFilm, borrow it off a friend or dig it out of your DVD collection and get watching. Remember what all the fuss was about. You won't regret it. 9 out of 10.

Viewing Date - 23rd September 2011

Original UK Release Date - 11th January 1985

Cast Overview:

Arnold Schwarzenegger ~ The Terminator

Michael Biehn ~ Kyle Reese

Linda Hamilton ~ Sarah Connor

Paul Winfield ~ Lieutenant Ed Traxler

Lance Henriksen ~ Detective Hal Vukovich

Rick Rossovich ~ Matt Buchanan

Bess Motta ~ Ginger Ventura

Earl Boen ~ Dr Peter Silberman

Director ~ James Cameron

Writer(s) ~ James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd

Acknowledgement to the works of Harlan Ellison and Additional Dialogue by William Wisher Jnr

30 Minutes Or Less

http://www.30minutesorless.com/

My best friend of the south recently pointed out the grammatical error of this film's title, it should in fact be 30 Minutes Or Fewer. But as the title is taken from a pizza commercial in the film I don't think we can berate them too much for their lack of grammar. In fact, it's likely to be a reference on how youths today have no grasp of the english language and end up working in pizza places as a result. Or that could be me reading too much into it. 

Either way, let's get on with proceedings. 30 Minutes Or Less is story of how a pizza delivery boy, Nick (Jesse Eisenberg), gets himself kidnapped and a bomb strapped to him. He is ordered to rob a bank by his kidnappers and told that if he doesn't get them $100,000 in 10 hours, he'll blow up. He can't go to the cops as they'll be watching him closely, so he enlists the help of his friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) and the two of them come up with a plan to get the money.

30 Minutes Or Less was directed by Ruben Fleischer who also directed Jesse Eisenberg in Zombieland, which was in my opinion one of the best films of 2009. And possibly Eisenberg's best performance to date. Forget about The Social Network, he was perfectly cast as the nervous geek opposite Woody Harrelson's tough nut and the two of them had great chemistry together. Fleischer hasn't quite managed to reach the heady heights of Zombieland here, but he has pulled off an above average comedy with another good performance from Eisenberg as the likable pizza boy who just wants to have things go his way for once. The teaming of Eisenberg with Ansari creates a believable friendship and some of the films funnier scenes are borne out of their banter.

Unfortunately, the same can't be said for Danny McBride's character Dwayne and his sidekick Travis played by Nick Swardson. Their friendship in comparison feels much more uneven as Travis is basically bullied into doing whatever Dwayne asks of him. Their conversations don't flow as easily as those of the good guys and seem a lot more dumbed down, I think to put across that they're not the sharpest tools in the box, but the end result leaves their scenes feeling a little flat.

Someone I did enjoy seeing in this movie is Fred Ward. An underrated and underused comic actor who should be doing more high profile movies. He puts in a small but great performance (as ever) as Dwayne's disapproving father, The Major.

To be honest, there's not a lot else to say about 30 Minutes Or Less. If you're looking for a genuinely funny comedy that will make you laugh, this is definitely the best of the comedies out at the moment. 7.5 out of 10.

Viewing Date - 21st September 2011

UK Release Date - 16th September 2011

Cast Overview:

Jesse Eisenberg ~ Nick

Danny McBride ~ Dwayne

Aziz Ansari ~ Chet

Nick Swardson ~ Travis

Dilshad Vadsaria ~ Kate

Michael Pena ~ Chango

Bianca Kajlich ~ Juicy

Fred Ward ~ The Major

Director ~ Ruben Fleischer

Writer(s) ~ Michael Diliberti (Screenplay and Story) and Matthew Sullivan (Story)

Jane Eyre

http://focusfeatures.com/jane_eyre

Owing to my lack of a high school education, I have never read many of the classic novels. No Austin, no Hardy, no Hemingway, no Dickens. And no Brontë. It somewhat goes without saying then that I have not read Jane Eyre. I'd heard of it of course, but never really had a desire to pick it up later in life. I'd also never seen one of the many adaptations of Charlotte Brontë's novel. That was until around two months ago when I stumbled upon the version starring William Hurt and Charlotte Gainsbourg on TV. 

That film surprised me as I hadn't intended to watch it but found myself pulled in and I ended up really liking it. So when I heard of another adaptation soon to be released I was interested to see what this would be like in comparison. 

The tale is one of an orphan girl, Jane (Amelia Clarkson), who is sent to live with her aunt, Mrs Reed (Sally Hawkins). Rather than taking good care of her orphaned niece, Mrs Reed resents being the girl's only living relative and ships her off to a boarding school out of the way. Upon leaving school Jane (now played by Mia Wasikowska) accepts a post as governess at Thornfield Hall. Her charge there is a young french girl, Adele (Romy Settbon Moore), who has been taken in by the illusive master of Thornfield, Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender). When he does eventually return to Thornfield after months away, Jane is faced with a situation she has never known before. She must not only converse with a man, something she has little experience of, she must also hold her own against this formidable, sometimes confrontational, imposing figure. A man she is rapidly falling in love with.

*Spoiler Alert*

As I have little knowledge of the book I only really have the other version of Jane Eyre to compare this to. And I have to say that as such, I found this version to have quite a complicated layout. The other film starts with Jane as a child, moves on to Thornfield, the almost wedding, Jane runs away, when she comes back she finds fire has consumed Thornfield and Rochester is injured. In this version we open on Jane after she has already run away from Thornfield and is taken in by St John and his sisters. It's almost as if the rest of the story is told in flashback, Jane as a child, then onto Thornfield, then back to Jane working for St John and then finally back to Thornfield again at the end. As such, those not acquainted with the book may find the order of events somewhat confusing.

I have read reviews on the previous version of Jane Eyre that I saw, in these reviews I see that the main complaint with that film was that the ending of the book was largely missed out. Namely, the scenes after Jane has run away and is working for St John. In this film though, I would say that their downfall is not showing enough of Jane's early life at Lowood School. As this is where she meets her one true friend, the tragic Helen Burns. These scenes were done so beautifully in the '96 version of Jane Eyre but have been mostly left out of the new version. I actually think this is more of a tragedy than leaving out the later scenes as without the early scenes you don't really have a sense of who Jane is or what she's been though in her life.

*End Spoiler Alert*

I also felt that the strange sequence the story was told in left little time for the scenes with St John to be played out fully. The last scene between Jane and St John ended really abruptly and left me feeling like their story was unresolved. As I've said, I have not read the book and maybe this is how these scenes are supposed to feel? But for me, as a viewer rather than a reader, I thought this could have been done better.

Mia Wasikowska was an adequate Jane in all but voice as she provided a fine English accent, but like Anne Hathaway in One Day, she struggled to be northern. Fassbender and Dench were also fine in their respective roles, but failed to make any real lasting impression on me. The real surprise for me was Jamie Bell, who I've never been a fan of. I thought he did a great job of the small, less showy role of St John, imbuing him with a warmth, if still reserved nature. 

Overall I think I preferred the '96 version of Jane Eyre as I didn't feel as though this film added an awful lot to what that film had already achieved. 6.5 out of 10.

Viewing Date - 19th September 2011

UK Release Date - 9th September 2011

Cast Overview:

Mia Wasikowska ~ Jane Eyre

Michael Fassbender ~ Edward Rochester

Judi Dench ~ Mrs Fairfax

Romy Settbon Moore ~ Adèle Varens

Jamie Bell ~ St John Rivers

Holliday Grainger ~ Diana Rivers

Tamzin Merchant ~ Mary Rivers

Imogen Poots ~ Blanche Ingram

Sally Hawkins ~ Mrs Reed

Amelia Clarkson ~ Young Jane

Freya Parks ~ Helen Burns

Craig Roberts ~ John Reed

Director ~ Cary Joji Fukunaga

Writer(s) ~ Moira Buffini (Screenplay) and Charlotte Brontë (Novel)

The Change-Up

http://www.thechangeupmovie.com/

I'm sure I've mentioned before that I'm quite fond of Ryan Reynolds. As such, it was a bit of a no-brainer that I would go and see The Change-Up. Though if I'm honest, it was a similar situation to the previous film I reviewed, I Don't Know How She Does It, as I thought the trailer looked awful.

In the film, Reynolds plays Mitch, an 'actor' who spends the majority of his days smoking weed and playing video games. His dad, Mitch Snr (the underrated Alan Arkin), thinks it's about time he grew up. Mitch's best friend is Dave (Jason Bateman), who by comparison is very grown up. He's about to make partner at his law firm and has a wife and three kids. That is until fate steps in and switches Mitch and Dave into each other's bodies. Dave becomes Mitch and Mitch becomes Dave. Following this unwanted transformation, they must not only find a way to rectify the situation, and fast, but they must also learn how to live each other's lives without raising suspicion of those closest to them.

We've all seen films like this before, Big and Freaky Friday are just two that spring to mind, and as such, this is not a new idea. It's also not a particularly fresh take on the story of body swaps, uptight guy with responsibilities gets to do as he pleases while slacker boy has to knuckle down and prove his worth.

The two leads here are what make a tired situation enjoyable. Both are believable as men with responsibilities and men who'd rather not have grown up at all. It helps that both Reynolds and Bateman have good comic timing, and make for convincing buddies. Fine support is also given by Olivia Wilde and Leslie Mann as Dave's law firm associate and Dave's wife respectively. Leslie Mann in particular kind of overshadows everyone else by putting in a rather moving performance at times.

There are nice little touches in this film which do set it apart from similar films of old, Leslie Mann's performance is one of them. The others are more subtle things like Dave's (and in turn Mitch as Dave) relationship with his daughter, which is a nice side story. As is Mitch's (and in turn Dave as Mitch) relationship with his father. Having said that, there are also things which set this film apart in a bad way. Like the amount of breasts you see in this film. I'm no prude but it honestly felt like all of the women in this film were only allowed in it if they were naked at least once. It was a little more flesh than I personally thought was necessary but I'm sure any men reading this will disagree. There were also slightly too many poo jokes or poo references for my liking. We're not 5 and that's when poo jokes stopped being funny.

So to sum up, the film doesn't really shed any new light on an old story but it's entertaining nonetheless. 6.5 out of 10.

Viewing Date ~ 18th September 2011

UK Release Date ~ 16th September 2011

Cast Overview:

Ryan Reynolds ~ Mitch Planko

Jason Bateman ~ Dave Lockwood

Leslie Mann ~ Jamie Lockwood

Olivia Wilde ~ Sabrina McArdle

Alan Arkin ~ Mitch Planko Snr

Director ~ David Dobkin

Writer(s) ~ Jon Lucas and Scott Moore

I Don't Know How She Does It

http://howshedoesitmovie.com/

On seeing the trailer for this film I said to my cinema buddy "that looks rubbish, but I'll probably end up seeing it." As it turns out, I was right, as it did look rubbish and I did end up seeing it. Most readers will not be surprised that I went to see this film but I'll go on record now and admit I'm not the biggest Sarah Jessica Parker fan in the world. I like Sex And The City, like most girls, but it took me a long time to get on board with it. If I'm honest, my problem with SJP is that I don't really know if she can cut it when she's not playing Carrie? 

I didn't like The Family Stone, Failure To Launch was okay, and I didn't even bother with Smart People or Did You Hear About The Morgans? But as my best friend of the north is the biggest SATC fan there is I felt I owed it to her to see (and review) this film. Fortunately for me, my best friend of the south has as much of a weakness as I do for chick flicks and agreed, along with my cinema buddy, to accompany me to see the movie.

I Don't Know How She Does It is based on a novel of the same name by Allison Pearson (I can feel this being added to the book club wish list already). It tells the story of Kate (SJP), a working mother who lets the world have an insight into how she juggles her career, working in Boston's financial district, her 2 kids, her husband, their nanny, her boss, possible promotion, school bake sales, head lice... you name it and she deals with it. Interviews with her friends and colleagues help to narrate the story but we also have Kate narrating (which is a bit Carrie!) and telling us about the lists of things she needs to do, that keep her awake at night. Will she be able to keep all her balls in the air (pardon the expression), or will her juggling act prove that she was just a clown all along?

The idea of the film (and I'm guessing the book too) is to show how one particularly organised mother of 2 manages to hold down a full time job. The reality is a film which tells us that the key to success are endless lists which you write on the bedroom ceiling, in your mind. Err okay. You also need an under-appreciated nanny, an assistant who it appears does all of your work for you and husband who never suspects you of having an affair no matter how many 'business trips' and 'late nights at the office' you have. Oh and you need to have the ability to ignore the blatant 'come on's of your boss. Mmmm.

One of my problems with the film were the 'interviews' with friends and colleagues. This suggested the film would be a 'documentary' style with Kate as the subject, but then the rest of the film just didn't fit with that at all. Plus, not only does Kate's stop time narration go against the idea of her being the subject, as I said in the synopsis, it also feels a bit too 'Carrie'. 

The film is also highly unbelievable, maybe because it's trying so hard to be 'real'? But somehow, despite the unrealistic nature of the storyline, the film doesn't come across all that badly. I would suggest this is down to the performances, but as two of the three leads are Sarah Jessica Parker and Pierce Brosnan I don't think this can be right? In truth I don't know how it works or why it works, but on some level it does work. Sarah Jessica Parker does have chemistry with both Pierce Brosnan and Greg Kinnear, and while I'm not her biggest fan, she is relatively convincing as a mother struggling to keep it all together. 

It's not going to win any awards (and if it does I may kill myself) but it's watchable, with likable characters and it doesn't require the use of too much brain power. So ladies, if you want to just veg in front of a film after a long hard day of 'real' work, you won't go too far wrong with this. 

Better than it looked but still not great. Watchable 6.5 out of 10.

Viewing Date ~ 18th September 2011

UK Release Date ~ 16th September 2011

Cast Overview:

Sarah Jessica Parker ~ Kate Reddy

Pierce Brosnan ~ Jack Abelhammer

Greg Kinnear ~ Richard Reddy

Christina Hendricks ~ Allison Henderson

Kelsey Grammer ~ Clark Cooper

Seth Meyers ~ Chris Bunce

Olivia Munn ~ Momo Hahn

Busy Philipps ~ Wendy Best

Jessica Szohr ~ Paula

Director ~ Douglas McGrath

Writer(s) ~ Aline Brosh McKenna (Screenplay) and Allison Pearson (Novel)

The Troll Hunter

http://www.trollhunterfilm.com/

The Troll Hunter is yet another film I knew nothing about until my cinema buddy advised me to watch the trailer. What would I do without him? Probably see less films is what. :0)

No sooner had he told me about the film when I saw the trailer for Troll Hunter on the next film I saw at the cinema, Fright Night. I wasn't sure if it was going to be funny or serious but it intrigued me enough that I decided to go and see what all the huge praise was about. 

We were quickly informed by cinema staff when purchasing our tickets, that this was a Norwegian film and therefore subtitled. I don't have a problem with subtitled movies but I certainly wasn't expecting that from the trailer I'd seen which showed no hint of subtitles (see below). Accepting the origins of the film and taking our seats we soon became very worried about the type of film Troll Hunter was going to be. From the trailer it looked quite light hearted, but all of the trailers before the movie were for horror films. And not just Final Destination type horror films but really sick looking horror films. 

In spite of this we stayed in our seats and were soon transported to Norway, where we were told that a group of three college students were making a film about illegal bear poaching...and this was the footage that was found when they went missing! DunDunDUUUUUN! The documentary footage shows the students as they try to get to the bottom of the mysteries surrounding supposed illegal poaching of bears across Norway's forests and mountain ranges. The students soon discover that trolls have been responsible for the disappearances of local people and the bears are being brought in later by government officials to cover up the existence of the trolls. In discovering the conspiracy to keep the trolls a secret, the students also discover the price for what they've captured on film.

Troll Hunter is quite an odd film to describe as it's not a comedy (despite the vibes you might get from the trailer) but it's not a serious film either. There are funny moments, but not hilarious and not frequent enough for the film to be considered a spoof. 

I also took into account the film following on from other movies which have supposedly been "real" documentaries, films like The Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield and Paranormal Activity to name but a few, which have all used the camcorder style of filming to chilling effect, in comparison to these films however, Troll Hunter just seems boring. There are moments that could have been genuinely scary but they just don't make the most of them.

Troll Hunter has quite good effects for what seems like a low budget Norwegian film but these don't make up for the movie feeling overly long. By the third troll discovery I was chomping at the bit for someone to die just to make it a bit more exciting. You could easily cut half an hour (possibly more) out of the film and it would probably have been all the better for it. 

Troll Hunter held such promise but in the end it just didn't live up to expectations. 6 out of 10.

Viewing Date - 12th September 2011

UK Release Date - 9th September 2011

Cast Overview:

Otto Jespersen ~ Hans

Glenn Erland Tosterud ~ Thomas

Johanna Mørck ~ Johanna

Tomas Alf Larsen ~ Kalle

Urmila Berg-Domaas ~ Malica

Hans Morten Hansen ~ Finn

Director/Writer ~ André Øvredal

Contributing Writer ~ Håvard S. Johansen

The Smurfs

http://www.smurfhappens.com/

I do have my reasons for wanting to see The Smurfs, but that doesn't make it any less embarrassing that I did go and see it. By myself. On a bright, early Sunday morning when I could have just stayed in bed. 

Moving swiftly on from my embarrassment at having to ask for 'one to see The smurf movie', I shall delve straight into the synopsis as I'm sure that's what everyone wants to read about anyway! Joking aside, I figure those with kids may want to know the plot for this update of the classic TV show of the 80s. 

Shot in 3D (though I saw the alternative 2D version), The Smurfs tells the story of Papa Smurf and his clan of blue children (how they were born without Mama Smurf I'm not entirely sure? Maybe more research is required?) who are eternally trying to outwit evil wizard Gargamel (Hank Azaria). The smurfs are trying to escape an attack on their village by Gargamel when several of them are sucked into a portal, along with Gargamel and his cat Azrael. The portal opens up in a strange new land called...New York. There the Smurfs must try to find a way back to the Smurf Village and end Gargamel's evil reign once and for all.

While I appreciate that The Smurfs is a kids film, this was made all the more obvious to me by me being the only adult there without an accompanying child. Yet another factor to add to my embarrassment, I was not only seeing what was undoubtedly going to be a pretty bad kids film, but I was choosing to do so without the prompt of a child. The parents in there must have thought I was mad, or very dodgy.

I will reinforce the mad theory and say that I did, for the most part, enjoy The Smurfs. I thought the little blue guys would annoy me but I was actually quite endeared by them. Especially Smurfette (voiced by Katy Perry) and the oh so sweet Clumsy. The character who did annoy me, and who I found was just a little too aimed at kids was Gargamel. He wasn't funny (except maybe if you're 5) and I just wanted him off the screen whenever he appeared. 

The other humans weren't bad with Neil Patrick Harris (How I Met Your Mother) and Jayma Mays (Glee) taking on the two main leads and interacting believably with the CGI'd Smurfs.

I would therefore recommend The Smurfs to anyone with kids to entertain and possibly even to fans of the cartoon, if you think you can stand Gargamel and Azrael's OTT performance. 5.5 out of 10.

Viewing Date - 11th September 2011

UK Release Date - 10th August 2011

Cast Overview:

Hank Azaria ~ Gargamel

Neil Patrick Harris ~ Patrick

Jayma Mays ~ Grace

Sofia Vergara ~ Odile

Director ~ Raja Gosnell

Writer(s) ~ Peyo (Characters), J.David Stern (Screenplay and Story), David N Weiss (Screenplay and Story), Jay Scherick (Screenplay) and David Ronn (Screenplay).

Friends With Benefits

http://fwb-movie.com/

The first thing I thought when I saw the trailer for Friends With Benefits was "Haven't I seen this movie already?" I was of course thinking of the uncanny similarities between this film and No Strings Attached which was released earlier this year. But I shouldn't judge a book by it's rip off cover as this is not the first time when two very similar films have been released in the same year, you may recall that Dante's Peak came out the same year as Volcano. As did Armageddon and Deep Impact. And although all of those films had similar themes, I'm sure their fans would agree that they are very different from each other. As are Friends With Benefits and No strings Attached. So let's get down to business (so to speak).

Here we have the story of Jamie (Mila Kunis), a headhunter for a big New York company who are looking for the new Editor of GQ Magazine. Jamie's most recent assignment is to look after hot shot LA Blog Editor Dylan (Justin Timberlake), while he's in New York for his interview. If she can sell him on the city that never sleeps, thereby coaxing him away from his friends and family in LA, maybe he'll take the job. Which of course, he does, and they soon become close friends as she's the only person he knows in New York. They soon turn their mutual griping about relationships and comforting of each other into a simple arrangement, sex and no emotions. But will it ruin a friendship that was starting to mean a lot to both of them for the sake of something as meaningless as casual sex?

Unlike the film it will be ultimately compared to, Friends With Benefits is about two people who have only just become friends, rather than the lifelong buddies seen in No Strings Attached. You may ask how this is important. I think it is, because it makes the whole film a lot lighter in tone than No Strings Attached as the couple at the center of proceedings (seemingly) have a lot less to lose. Unfortunately this seems to have made the creators of Friends With Benefits feel the need to make their film more emotionally engaging, and instead of sticking to the genuinely funny comedy and chemistry that Kunis and Timberlake have, they decided to go down the 'father with alzheimers' route. 

This storyline feels unnecessary in a film like this and does make it feel a lot heavier than it should. Having said that I think all of the actors involved do a great job with this subject matter, it just shouldn't be in this particular film.

But enough of that and back to the comedy, as I said, the lighter aspects of the film allow for more laugh out loud moments than were had in No strings Attached, and I do think that overall this makes Friends With Benefits slightly more enjoyable than it's counterpart. We also have fun cameo's from Andy Samberg and Emma Stone who play the boyfriend/girlfriend of Jamie and Dylan respectively at the start of the movie. 

While I stated earlier that Kunis and Timberlake have chemistry I will go one further and say that I can almost see what her character Jamie sees in him (almost - I'm not a Justin Timberlake fan so it takes a lot for me to say that). Something that can't be said for her supposed boyfriend at the start of the movie who dumps her. I don't care how emotionally damaged she is, there's no way that a geeky slacker such as Quincy would land a girl like Jamie, and if he did I don't think he'd dump her in the middle of the street. Maybe I'm giving guys more credit than they deserve but this start to the movie just didn't seem believable to me.

It's not a demanding movie, but an enjoyable fling for a Friday night with a friend nonetheless. 7.5 out of 10. 

Viewing Date - 9th September 2011

UK Release Date - 9th September 2011

Cast Overview: 

Justin Timberlake ~ Dylan

Mila Kunis ~ Jamie

Patricia Clarkson ~ Lorna

Jenna Elfman ~ Annie

Bryan Greenberg ~ Parker

Richard Jenkins ~ Mr Harper (Dylan's Dad)

Woody Harrelson ~ Tommy

Andy Samberg ~ Quincy

Emma Stone ~ Kayla

Director ~ Will Gluck

Writer(s) ~ Keith Merryman (Screenplay and Story), David A Newman (Screenplay and Story), Will Gluck (Screenplay) and Harley Payton (Story).