Mirror Mirror (2012)

Mirror Mirror is the first of two Snow White adaptations being released in the cinema this year, the second is out soon and there will undoubtedly be comparisons made between the two. From what I gather though, this is the more light hearted affair, with self knowing references from the wicked witch starting the film, and a comedic reversal of roles for the Prince and Snow White. The trailer intrigued me, and similarly it turned the majority of my friends off the film. I just thought it looked like it would be good fun, and it turns out I was kind of right.

Don't get me wrong, the film isn't going to blow you away, it's not that sort of film, but it is enjoyable nonetheless. Lily Collins (Daughter of Phil) nplays Snow White, and she is the straight guy in the film as far as I can tell. She's serious most of the time, even when presented with the rather unusual prospect of 7 small men living together in the forest she just takes it all in and gets on with her life. Julia Roberts is the most panto of the lot of them, which isn't to discredit her performance, I believe it was probably intended this way. She struts around the film with an air of superiority you'd expect from a vain and evil woman. The story is pretty much your standard Snow White Story except the Seven Dwarves are bandits rather than labourers (a nice tie in with the current economic difficulties), the Prince is a little whinier than before (but well played by Arnie Hammer), and there's a strange story involving Snow White's Dad (Played by a baffled looking Sean Bean)

See, now like I say, you shouldn't expect a masterpiece from this film; but I came out of the cinema thinking that it was a lot more fun than it had any real right to be. You see, the jokes don't always work, but when they do they're mostly quite clever and fun; the action isn't that inventive, but it helps the flow of the film keep up the pace, and the dance number at the end was just silly and pointless. But it was fun. So I may not have a great deal to say about this film, but if you're after a good fun family film you can't 

The Red Shoes (1948)

The Red Shoes Is one of those films that will quite conceivably blow your mind. Whether it is through a script that is one of the darkest 'U' certificate films I have ever seen, or whether it is the visiual imagery, which still seems contemporary today, the film deals with issues such as whether a person controls what they do, or whether what they do controls them. It deals with love, what we would do for love, and it looks at the very idea of obsession. It is a film that is about a ballet which is based on a Hans Christian Anderson book. This is a man who wrote the Little Mermaid and had her throw herself into the rocks at the end of it, so you kinda know you're going to get a dark tale here.

The film focusses on Vicki Page and Julian Craster, both are new to the Lermontov ballet company as a dancer and composer respectively. Both then find their moment with the first showing of The Red Shoes, recognising their talent they are pushed to the limelight where they create a show so spectacular it creates images in the mind so wonderful as to move you emotionally. This is actually one of the more technically interesting sequences in the film too, with Vicki herself being transported to fantastical landscapes and seeing magical arenas through the power of the music and the dance. It still looks fantastic today, and I wasn't even watching the restored version.

Cranston and Vicki fall madly in love, much to the annoyance of Lermontov, who despite never acting on his feelings for his leading ladies, doesn't tolerate them having love affairs at all. He claims that this is because if they start devoting their passion toward things other than the dance, then their performance will suffer. In reality it is probably just jealousy. As such Cranston and Vicki leave the company, but due to contracts they can never perform the Red Shoes again.. The allure and draw of the piece proves too much for Vicki, who is drawn back into the fold. Then she must make the decision whether to dance or love.

Early on in the film Vicki is asked by Lermontov why does she dance. Her reply is "Why do you want to live?" to which he replies "Well.. I don't know exactly why, but I must". This is the central idea of this film, that when it comes to our passions, we do not know why we do them, but we are simply compelled to by who we are. This is also enough to convince Lermontov that Vicki is serious about dancing rather than just having a passing interest.

The film is remarkably fresh still today, and besides looking a little dated from the film stock used, never feels like a film from the past. It's full of wonder and spectacle, and this is the second time I have seen it, and I cam tell you that it is better this time even than the first time I watched it. All the performances are spectacular, and the film just works on every level.

It's a story that is probably initially off putting to some, as I know ballet isn't always a cool thing, but the film is about so much more than that, it's about our very human instincts, and I think anyone who gives this film a chance will see that and recognise it for the wonderful piece of art that it is. I can't stress how much of an impact this film has had on me since I first saw it. One of the best films I've ever seen without a doubt.

Black Narcissus (1947) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Capturing The Friedmans (2003) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Fly Away Home (1996) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Passport To Pimlico (1949) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Submarine (2010) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Boogie Nights (1997) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

A Canterbury Tale (1944) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Corman's World (2011) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Marley (2012) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Salmon Fishing In The Yemen (2012) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Planet Terror (2007) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Shadows (1959) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Alice (1988) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Ordet (1955) - Review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Dr Strangelove: Or How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb (1964) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

The Cabin In The Woods (2012) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Headhunters (2011) - review coming soon

One of these months I'll actually finish a month with all the films reviewed. I will get these done asap.

Inside Deep Throat (2005)

Okay, so we're all familiar with Deep Throat right? No? Okay, well Deep Throat is probably the most successful Porn film of all time, both in terms of profit and exposure. It was released just at a time when Porn was becoming a hot political issue... again... and when America was going through cultural change.

This documentary looks at Deep Throat and examines the cultural and political events that surrounded the production and the aftermath of the release, being banned state to state, with phenomenal demand still there for the film. It looks at the ways that the film affected the people who starred in it, made it, and those who were affected in other ways too.

I think I was drawn to this film because a film like this could go two ways, it could either be gratuitous for gratuity's sake, or it could serve a purpose. I firmly believe that it is the latter, and I think the agenda it is trying to serve is to point out that as a nation too much importance is put on the immorality of pornography. In the film they discuss a scientific paper that was commissioned by the Nixon administration into the effect that pornography had on a person. This scientific study found that pornography had no detrimental effect on those who viewed it. This not being what they wanted to hear the report was basically ignored and Nixon went after the adult film industry in a big way. Cut to the eighties and Reagan and once again porn is an issue. Reagan is smart so he issues an unscientific study which relied on personal testimony rather than trials, and through selecting who you interview it was found that porn was dangerous, so a moral crusade was launched.

The point of all this is that the government in America, at the time at least, seemed far too concerned with the worries of a right wing Christian fringe group that was pushing this agenda than say, improving American healthcare. It was populist rather than a serious issue. But this film isn't a glowing appraisal of the porn industry. For those of you who've seen Boogie Nights (if not then why not?) there is a strong case to be made that the lead actor from Deep Throat was one of the inspirations for Dirk Diggler. Also interviewed are Linda Lovelace's sister, a harsh critic of the film and the industry; and these people are not shown up or victimised, they are respected and listened to.

I enjoyed this film, it was a strong documentary and I feel like I know more having seen it, it's a fairly tough topic to get people to open up about, but they do a fine job here and create a really interesting piece of film.

Avengers Assemble (2012)

So this is the film that they've been building up to for what seems like forever. Many complains were thrown at the preceding films stating that they felt more like very long trailers for the Avengers rather than a film about the character at hand, and sometimes those claims were probably partly justified (Captain America I'm looking at you), but sometimes I think the films fif particularly well on their own; I have a weak spot for Thor, which I thought was good fun entertainment. The worst thing this film could do though was be Iron Man 2 - Long and boring. It is long, but I don't think it's boring, thankfully.

The film begins doing exactly what the title suggests, it sets up a situation that Nick Fury & Co. Can't quite handle alone, and he begins getting together the world's most powerful people. These include Captain America (the kind of leader of the gang), Iron Man, Thor, Hawkeye, Black Widow, and Crucially to the success of the film, Hulk. Now Hulk has gone through a troubled series of films. It's never been clear that people really knew what to do with the character. The Ang Lee 'Hulk' was notable for the inventive use of comic book panels in the film, but was ultimately quite a flat and forgettable film. I never saw the Ed Norton Incredible Hulk, and have heard mixed reviews, but it didn't perform as hoped at the box office and HUlk has kind of been shelved ever since; until now.

Once all the characters have aired their grievances with one another and begun fighting amongst themselves, an event happens to unify them. I won't give too much away, but it is orchestrated by Loki (Thor's adopted brother and chief bad man in this film). The build up to this moment I found to be a little slow and it was the middle portion of the film that I felt was the weakest and failed to grab you in the same way that the rest of the film did. However, my friend sitting next to me expressed the opposite opinion, that it was here that he felt genuine threat and where the story really worked; so I could very well be wrong on this one.

Then we get the final battle between good and evil. This is a lot of fun, but it could be argued that it follows fairly conventional Hollywood lines of getting all the action out in one big bang at the end, with big explosions and crazy stuff going on everywhere. However, whilst this is a little bit of a normal occurrence in blockbusters, it isn't always done well. I thought it worked well here, with some very well choreographed action sequences mixed with wonderful one liners and lots of smashing from the aforementioned Hulk.

The humour is a large factor in the success of the film in my opinion, and it is here that Joss Whedon really makes his mark. One of the reasons why I hate Iron Man 2 so much is because it lost a lot of the humour and fun of the first film and ended up being about a self obsessed man with no sense of humour. Similarly, Thor worked really well, because let's face it, Thor is a ludicrous character, because it could laugh at itself and say, yes, this is stupid, but what the hell. Joss Whedon has made a living with great one liners littered throughout otherwise quite serious topics, probably best shown in Firefly. This is no exception, each character getting some wonderful and memorable lines to spout out to break some of the tension. The other area Whedon shines is through the strong women he writes so well, turning Scarlett Johansson's character from unlikeable into one of the essential characters in the film.

The film does have flaws, I've mentioned the slightly sagging mid section, and I would also add that it is too long. I understand that there are a lot of characters to reintroduce and I admire how well a job he did in getting it moving as well as he did, but it was noticeable. Also there were a few moments of cheese such as the closing line, which quite frankly is terrible. But I guess this is a superhero blockbuster, and maybe the cheese just comes with the territory.

This is a strong film, a film that is a lot better than it really has any right to be. It's not groundbreaking, It's not even close, but it is a lot of fun, and a very enjoyable film is really all I wanted from this film. I liked this film, and I think if you're after a blockbuster that isn't shit like transformers, then you couldn't go too wrong with Avengers Assemble.

Star Trek - The Motion Picture (1979)

Okay, so I decide that it's time. For years I have not watched a single Star Trek film, with no good reason to back up the decision. So the first Star Trek film seemed like the natural place to start. WRONG. This film is a waste of 2 hours, and I've checked with my friends who are big Star Trek fans, and they say that this film could easily be avoided, make no dent in understanding any other part of the franchise, and make everyone a whole lot happier as part of the deal. Unfortunately I am a completist and felt a need to start at number one.

So what makes the film bad? The main reason this film is a pile of shit is that it is 2 hours and basically nothing happens. I could easily sum up the first hour of the film with the phrase - they travelled to a big blue planet. Along the way we get lots of self congratulatory comments about getting the gang back together, and far far far too many external shots of the Enterprise, one sequence lasts around 7 minutes, and that's it, just showing off a ship with no dialogue. Let's face it, we've seen the enterprise before, and it's a fairly smooth structure, not that much going on. Admittedly it's a lovely model, Douglas Trumble's involvement is a sure fired reason to praise the special effects, but there really is only so much you can take.

Shatner is another problem. Now I know there's not much you can do about the star of the show when it comes to adapting it for the big screen, but the man can't act. To me his acting style is very much similar to that of a young amateur Shakespearian actor who feels the need to put emphasis in places that the dialogue should add natural emphasis. In short it's laughable. On the plus side, Kirk is such a proud and pompous character that it kinda works. The rest of the cast I have few issues with, and all do their jobs with aplomb.

The story is about a large blue mass that is moving toward earth, looking to swallow it up like it had done other planets, seeking information on the universe before destroying it. The Enterprise must go investigate this mass and conclude what to do. They spend the majority of the film getting there, with no excitement along the way, and when they get there very little changes. There are questions about Spock's loyalty to the mission, and a few times when the ship doesn't work properly, but other than that it's fairly pedestrian. The planet turns out to be a computer of sorts, which of course means Spock communicates with it the most. There's a twist (kind of) and a message which wouldn't have been too far out of place in a Hippy commune, and then that's that.

This film suffers from being dull, something that they thankfully solved for the next film in the series. It was a failed attempt to capture the Star Wars Market, when instead they should have been  creating their own market. This film would have made a great opening 20 minutes of another film, but really they couldn't stretch it that far. Unfortunately, whilst I am ultimately glad to have seen it in order to get me on my way to watching more Star Trek films, It leaves me with no desire to ever watch it again, and if I didn't know better was to come, then I'd be very tempted to give up now.

The Sorcerer's Apprentice (2010)

Sp; Nic Cage... I know he's a Coppola, and that probably explains it, but how on earth does this man get so much work. There can't surely be as many people as me who like to watch his films out of awe, a sick obsession where you are constantly wondering if he can get worse than he has previously (The answer is normally yes). I don't even think his films do that much money, and yet he's constantly being handed these high budget films which are supposed to appeal to God knows who and he's had a career that's lasted an unfair amount of time considering.

Now we have the Sorcerer's Apprentice, a film where Nic Cage plays a Sorcerer, who yes, takes on an apprentice, an apprentice who is supposedly going yo be the salvation for the planet, who will finally bring about an end to the bad Wizards in the world. This apprentice is a fairly geeky kid who doesn't really believe what's happening to him, let alone any of the nonsense about him being a chosen one. It's a fairly tired conceit if I'm honest, and feels very much like a lot of Disney crap that they're putting out from their live action arm at the moment.

I assume this film is aimed at pre-teen boys, and it really does feel like that a lot of the time, but whilst other 'kids films' don't patronise or bore the audience, this film does. You've got Nic Cage delivering every line like it's a deep and meaningful message, and action that really fizzles out rather than bangs.

The long and short of it is that this film sucks. Like it's really bad. I think young children may enjoy it for the ridiculous nature of it, but like so many films you enjoy as a child, if you watch it later in life (say when you have independent thought), then you'll wonder why you watched it in the first place. Avoid.

50/50 (2011)

Okay, so first we had Funny People, and now we've got 50/50, it seems like Seth Rogan is carving out a career playing the friend of someone with Cancer and helps them struggle through it. But whilst Funny People moved beyond the disease into love interests and unfortunately tedium, 50/50 stays with Cancer the entire film, and is all the better for it. The DVD case is also very misleading, stating that it is a Laugh Out Loud comedy - It's not. It's funny, but it's also incredibly tender and sweet (not sickly) and normally raises a chuckle or warm smile rather than belly laughs, something again that I would say was a positive rather than a negative point.

The Story is pretty much what happened to the person who wrote the film. Adam (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) develops a form of Cancer in his back which gives him a 50% chance of survival. He goes in for chemotherapy, has struggles with his family, his friend and girlfriend and strikes up a friendship with his therapist, a very young Anna Kendricks for whom he is only her third patient. This doesn't sound like much, but the film is wonderful in it's subtlety, and instead of looking at an internal struggle with Cancer, painting the patient as a victim, or a hero, untouchable of criticism in case you infer that maybe they shouldn't survive. Instead of that 50/50 paints Adam as, well, human. He has flaws, he becomes very self involved, and the film chooses to look at how the illness is affecting those who love him; from his friend who seems to be using his illness to get laid, or his mum who becomes very clingy and annoys Adam, the film studies them and actually shows that whilst yes, the Cancer victim has the most to lose from the illness, they are definitely not the only people that are hurt by it.

Like I say, most of the film is not the advertised 'Laugh Out Loud' humour, and the closest we get to that is Seth Rogan, showing off his numerous cock jokes, or generally being a little crude. far from being a distraction from the main theme of the film, it is actually a natural relief from the glum nature of the rest of the film. To see someone who, at least on the surface, is still positive and upbeat about matters is both refreshing and welcome. Though he is not exclusively the root of the humour, the relationships that Adam has are very identifiable in one form or another, whether it is the mother who wants her little boy back, the absent father (unfortunately absent in the respect he has Alzheimers rather than having run away), the friend who is a bit of a dick, but at his heart he loves you dearly, there's all of these, but I found myself identifying with Anna Kendricks' Psychiatrist who is new at her job, but her job is vital, she can't fuck up, because if she fucks up then she ruins someone's life. Now whilst I am not even close to that situation, I recognise the feeling of trying to do your best, and the constant worry that you're going to mess up, and the effects that has for other people.

Like I say, this film is a comedy about cancer, so I hope you would expect a film like this. An intelligent film, a film that doesn't hold back on sentiment, but sugars the blow with mirth, a film that is honest and really very touching. I really liked this film, and It definitely made me think more about the people I care about.