Attack The Block

Making good use of my Cineworld card (consistently good value filmgoers) i headed along to watch Joe Cornish's feature film debut: Attack The Block. I'd been waiting patiently for its release after reading about it on Twitter and having been a fan of The Adam & Joe show i was sure it would be an entertaining watch at least.

Attack The Block is a comedy laced sci-fi/horror centred around a gang of "youfs" from "saffff lahndahn" who, fresh from mugging a young female nurse called Sam (Jodie Whittaker), deal with an impromptu alien invasion that takes place during bonfire night in a council estate. After they beat to death a small alien they incur the wrath of its larger, nastier alien friends resulting in a game of cat and mouse between the gang, led by the moody and misunderstood Moses (John Boyega), armed Police, the aforementioned aliens and a local drug-lord. As a result the bodycount on all sides is considerable and there are a few good explosions and chase scenes (on scooters, bmx's and a paddy wagon).

Right from the start Attack The Block doesn't take itself too seriously and despite a modest budget it doesn't suffer from looking like a low budget film. The aliens themselves, while not necessarily reaching the heights of the aliens in Aliens and Alien 3, are certainly no worse than the shaved gorilla suit in the vent scene in Alien and the glow in the dark teeth and eyes are a nice addition. Any crashes, explosions or injuries are, for the most part blessed with a decent level of realism and are not regularly exposed by the constraints of the films budget.

The characters are the usual rag-tag cliches associated with films within this genre. We have the misunderstood hero, the shrewish woman who grows a pair and rises to the challenge set out in front of her, the wise-cracking yet loveable vagabond and the often criminally underused comic relief. These types of characters are obviously here as an homage to the characters in the films that helped shape Attack The Block and they lend an air of familiarity to the film that gives it an endearing quality. The only downside to this type of characterisation is that it often lacks an element of depth and gives way to a breed of one-dimensionalism. However, given the age of the main cast, there are performances of note throughout Attack The Block that raise it just above that bar and as it doesn't suffer as a result. The performance of the film, for me, goes to Alex Esmail (Pest) who comes across as a junior Han Solo with his cheeky dialogue and gung-ho bravado.

The score, by Basement Jaxx and Steven Price, is understated but pulses along nicely within the film itself bringing tension or subtlety as required.

Ok, so Attack The Block isn't going to be representing the British Film Industry at the glitzy Hollywood award ceremonies but it certainly punches above its weight and performs admirably throughout in the entertainment stakes. Whilst it doesn't exactly hit the heights of Shaun of the Dead it certainly stands well next to other UK films like Dog Soldiers and is considerably better than the likes of Severance. There are ample laughs and jumps alike and as a debut film it certainly acts as an interesting stepping stone for what is sure to be an enjoyable career for Joe Cornish.

7/10

Stay Epic

Buddy

Inception

So, I went to see Inception last night with my lovely other half. I think I can honestly say that the film itself definitely lives up to the projected media hype. Even a few moments into the film I was left feeling like I was watching a blockbuster that strives to make you think about whats going on rather than spoon feed you every last detail. This is a quality that is lacking in most modern blockbusters as the film companies strive to get bums on seats and sacrifice intense and interesting plots for eye-popping special effects and gimmicks like 3D. While that sort of practice is a necessary evil in order for film companies to generate money so that they can take a risk on more interesting films it's still soul destroying when so many of these sorts of films lack the one device that they sorely need, a decent plot. Inception is certainly not lacking on this front.

The main premise of Inception is the concept that the human mind's unconscious can be accessed via someones dreams and as a result can be subjected to both the removal of the subjects deepest secrets or other important information (Extraction) and also the subversive planting of ideas (Inception). The artificial dream-like state is induced by chemical sedation and the dream itself constructed as a lifelike artificial world by dream architects. While this in depth plot premise might put a lot of people off it does show a bit more innovative thought from the film's writers. The pace of the film pulls you in from the first few frames and it is fairly unrelenting throughout giving the viewer little time to collect their thoughts. I personally enjoyed this approach as it dragged me further in to the plot and kept me interested in the next twist or turn.

The acting throughout was very strong with the highlights being both DiCaprio and Marion Cottilard both of whom showed great depth with their performances allowing you to feel a sense of warmth and understanding for their characters. There were also accomplished performances from Joseph Gordon-Levitt, whose previous films all showed great promise for a young actor, and Cillian Murphy though both felt a little bit restrained and maybe could've given a little more to strengthen their roles. While there were many positives in this film acting-wise i felt that the part played by Ellen Page was very underwhelming offering very little support in her role and providing virtually nothing to empathise with as a viewer. I felt that this was a shame as Page is a very charismatic actress, you only have to look at some of her previous work (Juno and Hard Candy) to know that she can hold an audience. She has had some stinkers though in X-Men: The Last Stand and Whip It, so maybe she needs to put a bit more thought into what parts would suit her personality better. She may, however, have been held back by the constraints of the part she was playing but the measure of a good actor/actress is the ability to own a role regardless of the stature or the part. Bringing me nicely to the pointless addition of Michael Caine. Why? Playing Cobb's (DiCaprio) father could easily have been given to a less well known actor. Caine offered nothing in such a small part and represented an obvious tag for biggest waste of money in the film.

Visually the film was stunning on occasion and only had a few moments of underwhelming special effects. In a film where creating a believable environment was particularly important as an integral part of the plot the lush architecture designed within the film came across very well and in the moments where the perception of reality were questioned within the film the special effects team pulled out the stops, particularly with the 360 degree corridor, and delivered a seamless feel to the film. There was only one point where i was unimpressed by the effects, a scene where Cobb and Ariadne (Page) walk "up" a street, and that particular scene just looked clumsy. Otherwise the film is flawless and some of the cinematography is both beautiful and brutal in equal measure lending an impressive and epic feel to the whole film.

Does this film live up to the hype then? In my view, yes. There are so few films shining a light of individuality in a very dark and gloomy expanse at the moment that you could be forgiven for taking the reviews with a pinch of salt. In fact, I believe that they don't do the film the justice it deserves. Is it Oscar material? Probably not. But nonetheless it is a strong and interesting film and it strives to pull you in from start to finish. There are very few flaws in Inception and if you allow yourself to be drawn in to the world built in front of you you won't be disappointed.

Stay Epic

Buddy

4/5

It's been a while...

No, not the Staind song. I stumbled upon the, I'll assume lost rather than forgotten, log-in details of my blog. Christ, I don't half waffle absolute bobbins!

A lot has happened in the past few years (I'm nearly bloody well 30 for starters!) but i'm going to make a conserted effort to get back to doing what i was going to do with this (before the onset of early senile dementia addles my brain further) and review some films.

I'm seeing Inception tomorrow. Be prepared for an in-depth musing of whether it lives up to the hype or not.

Stay Epic

Buddy Israel

Iron Maaaaaan!!

Please excuse the lack of Bloggery in the past month or so, i've been doing some other shizzle and i've not been to the cinema much recently :(

So, me and the S-Man ventured out to the flicks last night so i could finally lay my peepers on Iron Man. I've been waiting for absolutely shitting ages to see this film. It looked amazing from the trailers and Robert Downey Jnr (in my opinion) looked like a great choice to play the title role. He reminded me of Michael Keaton's portrayal of Batman (easily the best Batman in my opinion, though Christian Bale may sneak it if Dark Knight is good) i.e that really uncomfortable type who looks at odds with the responsibility of defending the people.

The opening 30 minutes of the film are pretty typical franchise opening Superhero movie back story but it's still engaging and helps give you an insight into the main character Tony Stark (Downey Jnr). I would like to point out that you certainly don't need to know anything about the comic book series to enjoy this film as you learn all you need to know about it in the opening 30 minutes. The director (Jon Favreau. Note to self Mr Favreau: Don't appear in your own movie, you aren't Kevin Smith, even a Cameo is trite) doesn't treat those with prior knowledge of the comics like idiots by glossing over the improtant points but he also doesn't alienate newcomers with a ridiculously in-depth prologue within the film itself. It projects a good balance leaving it open for both casual cinema goer and genre geeks.

Downey Jnr is instantly likable in his role and his awkward demeanor coupled with his arrogance and aloof attitude creates an impression of a man at odds with himself (very much like Downey Jnr himself) which makes him a perfect choice for Tony Stark. The dialogue is fairly pedestrian but something about Downey Jnr's delivery reels it back in and adds a bit more life to it. That breath of life is desperately needed at times as the dialogue really does drag and without the dry sarcasm and interjected comedy asides it would stutter away uninterestingly throughout the film. Thankfully they didn't go overboard physically with Downey Jnr's training prior to the film and whilst he doesn't exactly look out of shape he's not exactly a rippling mass of muscle, owing more to the physicality of what you would expect from a fit middle aged man. This element of the character allows you to see that the man under the suit is after all just a man which really humanizes him rather than elevating him to a superior level. It acts as a rather good metaphor for the old adage: "It's what's on the inside that counts".

The supporting cast is really where the films inconsistencies lie. Jeff Bridges looks very imposing with a shaved head and a big bushy beard as Obadiah Stane but he just doesn't come across well as a villain. The whole time i was watching him on screen i was constantly reminded of "The Dude" from The Big Lebowski. It just didn't help in convincing me that he was the main villain in the film. I think it may be his voice that contributes most to that as he always sounds too laid back regardless of what role he is adopting, his physical presence was certainly adequate for his role in this film though. The role really would have benefited from having someone with an air of menace vocally.

On the other hand Gwyneth Paltrow fairs a lot better in her role as the rather ludicrously (but totally comic book) named Pepper Potts (i know her first name is actually Virginia before any comic book geeks have a go). She carries off the lovestruck secretary role very well. She looks the part and boy has she got better looking with age, there is something rather appealing about the way she walks and talks in her scenes. Her voice carries undertones of a certain fragility but her movements suggest otherwise, evoking more of an air of confidence and sexual power. As does the way she's been dressed. She looks amazing in that backless number during the charity ball scene but she really shines in the pencil skirt/suit jacket combos that her character looks more comfortable in. It's nice to see that they opted for a more realistic "look" rather than the whole sassy, busty heroine type that usually gets thrust into the token eye candy role. She certainly comes across as charming and demure. Plaudits must go to the make-up department for making her look realistically shattered and as if she'd been crying for days upon Tony's return from captivity (either that or someone had told Gwyneth that Chris Martin had named the new Coldplay album "Viva La Vida" and she'd spent days crying with laughter).

The other cast members are fairly low key and don't really add anything to the story as such. Terence Howard manages fine as James Rhodes though his role in this film is rather understated presumably as he plays a much bigger part in the next film (if they continue the story arc as it is within the comics). He's a bit bland in truth but isn't as out of sorts as Bridges and i don't know whether he'll be as good a choice in hindsight for the casting team when it comes to him donning the Iron Man suit further down the line. He really lacks depth and character as an actor in my opinion and i'm sure there would have been better choices out there for that particular role. I will stand corrected if he comes out of his shell in the future though. Shaun Toub (who? yeah, i've never heard of him either) is passable yet underwhelming as Dr Yinsen. The dialogue between him and Downey Jnr during the escape sequence in particular is laughably bad and a total cheese-fest. Interestingly, the only other supporting cast member of note, Paul Bettany, only lends his voice as Stark's personal A.I butler "Jarvis". But as far as voice acting goes it wasn't exactly laced with material to make it outstanding, which is a shame because Bettany is quite a charismatic actor.

Visually the film is stunning and the CGI is nearly faultless though judging from ILM's recent work (Pirates of The Caribbean: At Worlds End and Transformers) that is no real surprise. The visual effects were in your face enough to give that "wow" factor but still realistic enough to not leave you asking too many questions. They managed to maintain a gritty realism with the machines and suits of armour that help make it a little more believable. Directors should take note of ILM's treatment of this film as very often the CGI in modern films can look a little too processed, see the Spiderman series and the fight sequences in the Blade films for reference.

Sound-wise, the film score was great with the music underpinning scenes rather well. However, the overall effects dynamics were a little drab compared to some of the more pulsating sound effects used in other recent films (Transformers being one that springs to mind instantly). The explosions, for example, go off a little like a damp squib, lacking the punch and force that they really needed. That may well have been Favreau's intention so as to not make the film seem like it was just a run of the mill action romp and that it had a bit more depth to it than just gut churning rumbles and overly theatrical sonics, but i really feel that it needed a little more oomph just to make it a little more of an audio spectacle as well.

Overall where this film lacked in areas, it more than made up in others and while i'm still left searching for that quintessential Superhero film Iron Man has really raised the bar. I only hope that they can push the boundaries a little more with the sequel so that we can really be talking about something genre defining.


Stay Epic

Buddy

x

Jumper

Not the woolly malarkey that your Nan knits, but the Doug Liman directed sci-fi romp.

I hit the flicks on Monday night to see this, a film I'd been quite eager to see after being reasonably impressed by the Trailers. I was not impressed.

I didn't realise how much i despised Hayden Christensen's acting until about 2 minutes in when he started narrating the rather flimsy "back story". His voice over was excruciatingly drawl and devoid of any urgency. His on screen "presence" carries all the charm and charisma of a festering piece of roadkill. He was terrible in the Star Wars films as well. He seems to carry the same cinematic traits as Jennifer Garner, i think I'm going to call it "Thumb Up Ass Acting". Like Garner, he seems to look so uncomfortable facially when acting that it becomes the focal point of his performance. I have honestly yet to see him in anything where his acting is actually good or even passable.

As for the supporting cast: Samuel L. Jackson what in the name of hell are you doing? This is not the place for an actor of your caliber! The man who delivered perfect performances as Jules Winnfield (Pulp Fiction) and Zeus Carver (Die Hard With A Vengeance) should not be rotting away in a film like this. His character was terrible and the dialog awful. Rachel Bilson was nauseatingly one dimensional as well. She was clearly only there to attract the seething hordes of teenage male O.C fans and they were rewarded with: a brief shot of her in a pair of jeans and a bra. Nice work Liman? She's not a terrible actress at all and i really hope she is appalled by her role in this film. The actress who played her character in the opening 10 minutes of the film (AnnaSophia Robb) was much better and if they'd developed the character better over the film we might have seen the more interesting side of her talents rather than her being wasted as a token piece of skirt. I don't even know what to say about Jamie Bell's performance other than if anyone can tell me what accent he was trying to achieve, please let me know. Yes, you did Billy Elliot. Bravo.

As for the film itself. The story was so unintelligible that i honestly don't know exactly what the point of it was. It was the sort of throw away short attention span nonsense that i just really can't bring myself to dig deeper into. Maybe that's the intention though as if you started to over analyze the story itself it would be riddled with bizarre plot holes and continuity lapses. I felt no affinity for the characters at all. The script was abysmal and it lacked the sharp wit that should be expected in a sharp, modern Sci-fi action thriller. The special effects were uninspiring as well. With the techniques that are currently available in CGI (used to great effect in things like 300) this film came off as more CBBC mid-day schedule than box office and with a reported budget of $85m that really isn't good enough.

I can't even attribute my dislike of this film to the genre as i generally enjoy films of this type on some level at least and i don't expect them all to be overtly intellectual either. After all, everyone enjoys the odd explosion or fast paced, well choreographed fight sequence.

I can't think of any good reason to go and check this film out at all but I'm loathed to say avoid it completely.

Buddy
x

Tuesday 12th Feb '08

I went to see Juno last night at the cinema. Initially i was very skeptical about this film because on first impressions it looked like an a-typical rom-com for the "kool kids", and having read a plot summery on IMDB it looked like that's what i had in store. I couldn't have been more wrong.

Whilst Juno did have the schmaltzy "first love" styling of a million other films aimed at the 14-25 age group there was no americanised high gloss to it. The fact that it forsook the sheen of Hollywood and headed down the "indie" film route instead (despite having some reasonably high profile and up-and-coming stars) reminded me more of films like Napoleon Dynamite and Chasing Amy.

The relationship between Juno (Page) and Paulie (Cera) had a charming awkwardness to it and left an underlying feeling of maturity belying their character's years. In fact, Ellen Page delivered a performance that highlights and expands upon the foundations she laid with her previous film, Hard Candy. Her line delivery is so dry and natural that it's instantly believable and the script writers provided her with some outstandingly witty material that recalled the often inappropriate and naive dialogue heard between teens and adults. Another charming facet to Page's performance was that despite her title role in the film her character was not the sole shining light and she held back on occasion to allow others to step forward. Her ego does not take up the screen, as is often the case with younger charismatic actors/actresses. As a result we get to see the acting talents of her co-stars as well.

Michael Cera doesn't have much screen-time until nearer the end but he is so ungainly and likable that you can't help but feel some empathy for his situation and it was like looking in a mirror and recalling how awkward i felt personally as a teenage boy. Jennifer Garner portrays her character well though she carries with her a "wooden" acting style that's been evident throughout her career, though it's maybe not as noticeable here as it is in Pearl Harbor and Elektra. Allison Janney and J.K Simmons both have interesting moments as Juno's oft put upon parents and they each deliver some poignant dialogue that helps the viewer not only identify with them but also with Juno. Even though she is very much a periphery character in the film Olivia Thirlby, as Leah, has some mood lightening moments, especially when Juno breaks the news of her pregnancy to her parents. Having said that it would be very easy for Thirlby to be typecast as "miscellaneous quirky friend" in similar teenage flicks which could sadly see her fade into obscurity as she outgrows that particular role (See Corey Feldman)

The character I most identified with was Jason Bateman's portrayal of Mark, one of the prospective adoptive parents for Juno's unborn child. His character as a put upon, trapped and stifled male in his early 30s clearly unready for his role as a parent and grasping to hold onto his younger self is both saddening and reassuring at the same time. Although he could come across, depending upon how you view his role in the film, as an unlikable person I found it hard not to feel sympathetic towards his character and ultimately couldn't bring myself to dislike him in the end.

Stylistically and visually Juno comes across as charmingly low budget but it certainly doesn't suffer from it. The rotoscoping at the start over the opening titles was cute and the recurring theme of runners throughout the film acted as an interesting metaphor that underpinned the whole film: running from your problems.

The music chosen for the film is perfect and the songs by anti-folk singer Kimya Dawson (and her band The Moldy Peaches) in particular are aptly chosen for the points in the film where they are used. The inclusion of bands like Sonic Youth, Belle and Sebastian and Cat Power on the soundtrack as incidental music smacks a bit of standard "indie" film fare but it's not unwanted or out of place within the film.

In all Juno is a smart film. Despite it's gloomy subject matter and the resulting effects of Teenage Pregnancy on it's characters i left the screening feeling happy and fulfilled. It's more than worth the ticket money and is definitely a worthwhile purchase on Blu Ray/DVD when it is released. Don't go in closed minded, allow Juno to entertain you and immerse you in her world. You won't regret it.

Buddy