Prometheus (2012)

Image from IMP Awards

Prometheus (2012)

"We were wrong! We were so wrong!"

The above line, uttered by Noomi Rapace's character Dr. Elizabeth Shaw in Ridley Scott's return to science fiction in 30 years, pretty much sums up my assessment of the - perhaps unreasonable - expectations the film has engendered. The fact that Scott directed the classic and brilliant progenitor to this film, Alien, makes the disappointment that much more stinging.

Prometheus begins intriguingly enough with a brief prologue involving a mysterious, beefy humanoid alien. This leads in to a second prologue in which Dr. Shaw and her bland boyfriend Charlie (Logan Marshall-Green) discover ancient cave paintings that point to a star pattern, one that is contained in a series of disparate paintings from different time periods and cultures. The implication is that human development, perhaps even our origin itself, was alien in nature. This initial premise sets alarm bells off straight away as to the intellectual level the film is striving for, but it is easy enough to put aside as a flight of fancy if developed in an interesting way. Sadly, it isn't developed in an interesting way at all. In fact, I think it's fair to say that the film is completely glib in the way it handles its ideas.

After the prologues we are transported light years away and in to the primary narrative. The space ship Prometheus arrives at the planet pointed to in the paintings, the crew - including the two scientists, android David (Michael Fassbender), the ship's Captain Janek (Idris Elba), and company overseer Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) - awake from stasis / hyper sleep and brief the remainder of the nondescript scientific grunts as to the purpose of their secret mission. Namely, that they are here to discover the origins of mankind and perhaps to quite literally meet our maker. The ship lands near an 'intelligently designed' structure on the planet, the crew hops out to explore its cavernous interior and discover... well, I won't go into details but in truth, not all that much of consequence apart from some dead aliens, holograms, and things that will be familiar to fans of the original film. From that point onwards the film shifts into horror/thriller mode, the half baked ideas are dropped, picked up again, and then dropped again as the story builds towards an explosive climax.

So what's wrong with the film? To get the obvious out of the way, I'm not complaining that the film isn't enough like 'Alien'. On the contrary, it actually borrows a little too much from that film in terms of story beats. It's also not a knee jerk reaction to expectations - I ended up seeing it twice, and my expectations were out the window during viewing number two.

The major problem is the fairly dire story and script; it should come as little surprise that 'Lost' writer Damon Lindelof was involved in writing it. The whole thing raises 'questions' and 'mysteries' that are somewhat interesting but aren't examined in any meaningful way, and by the end, hardly anything is resolved and we are given the set up for a sequel that teases potential answers. God and 'Darwinism' are name dropped in the most superficial way, with Shaw being a religious scientist who 'chooses to believe' things and regularly clutches her cross. The purpose of 'the engineers' of mankind is raised, but again only perfunctorily. Birth and the creation of life are brought up and lead in to a tangential subplot that feels horribly contrived. The rape subtext from the original film is made silly and overt. And as far as plotting goes, lots of stuff happens that makes very little sense.

The film is in an awful hurry to get from one scene to the next, never allowing one to build up to anything of substance, never allowing any tension or awe to take hold; a serious misstep in a story about first contact with alien life forms who also happen to be our creators. The whole affair is strangely inert and devoid of feeling. The dire dialogue doesn't help at all, populated as it is with repetitive Hollywood blockbuster cliches. Characters behave in idiotic and impulsive ways, incongruosly so for a team of 'expert' scientists. The narrative stop starts, shifts gears, and erupts into violence on occassion but all of it feels disjointed and the characters themselves don't seem too involved in what's going on around them. Most of the supporting cast are forgettable, which compounds the film's problems. To top it all off, the musical score is loud, overbearring, and repetitive.

That's the bad, but there is a lot good in the film as well. First of all, visually it's simply stunning. The effects, sets, costumes, and design work, some of which have their origins in the seventies, are stunningly realized. Scott's camera work is smooth and coherent and his shots are epic, and he does create atmospheric sequences. It genuinely looks and feels like what we are watching could be real. Rapace, though a far cry from Sigourney Weaver's Riply, makes for a decent lead, wonky fake English accent and all. Idris Elba is reliably cool despite having very little to work with. Charlize Theron is excellent as the icy Vickers, ironically one of the few characters who seems like a human being.

And then there's David, the android, played to perfection by Michael Fassbender. David's presence is by far and away the most interesting part of the film. It's the one relatively subtle and intelligent thematic element, paralleling as it does the broader questions about the creation of life and the relationship between creator and creation. Fassbender gets decent words and he makes the most of it, playing David with an undercurrent of sardonic menace, moving with graceful and mechanical precison, and exhibiting a sometimes childlike sense of curiuosity. His motives are never really clear - again, lousy plotting - but he's never anything less than compelling.

Prometheus is ultimately it's a science fiction film whose intellectual pretensions extend well beyond their grasp. It devolves into a horror thriller but is never truly scary, horrifying, or thrilling. It's fairly entertaining and looks good, and is mostly salvaged by one brilliant character and performance. Worth seeing for genre fans and fans of the Alien series. The ill advised final scene, which is truly groan inducing and exists solely as fan service, is a fitting note on which to end what is a poorly conceived film. In an era where almost anything that can be imagined can be realized on screen believably, the fact that this was the end result is nothing short of disappointing.

Haywire (2011)

 (Image from IMP awards)

Haywire (2011)

It's not often that you get an action movie that is better received by critics than it is by the movie going public, but Haywire appears to be finding itself in just that atypical situation. This is perhaps fitting since it is an atypical action film, which may help to explain audience apathy. As one patron said to another as they left the screening I attended  (to paraphrase) "the trailer was like, sick, but the story was confusing".

In fairness, the story is a tad convoluted but not especially confusing. The film begins 'in media res' with a woman named Mallory (played by former MMA fighter Gina Carano) forced to go on the run with a hostage (Michael Angarano), to whom she recounts her tale. Mallory is an agent/operative for a private agency run by a man named Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) that carries out contracts like rescue and protection (and possibly other stuff). Following a rescue operation carried out with fellow operative Aaron (Channing Tatum) she's quickly pushed into another job, a cushy babysitting job that turns out to be anything but, one that leads to her being betrayed and hunted down by her agency and the authorities. Also in the mix are Michael Douglas as a government agent who hires Kenneth's agency for a contract and Antonio Banderas as a shady middle man.

On the surface it's a typical 'wrongfully accused hero on the run and out for revenge' tale. Actually it's essentially that beneath the surface as well, but as I said before it is atypical. The plot is silly and nonsensical but still compelling enough to drive the action. Steven Soderbergh isn't really known for making run of the mill films, and this is definitely a Soderbergh film through and through. There are many quiet periods and copious amounts of small character moments and detail throughout, and the dialogue is garrulous and delivered in a monotone that is occasionally punctuated by dead pan humour. It's visually slick, with distinctive colour filters employed, and it has an energetic and, well, 'cool' musical score.

In terms of action, there's surprisingly little of it, which may be one of the reasons people lured in by the trailer expecting non stop ass kicking may feel cheated. Despite the story being over the top, there's a grittiness to it and a believability to the central character - there are moments where Mallory seems vulnerable, like the brilliant scene in which she makes an escape walking furtively along a street, hyper sensitive to every sound and movement around her, sensing imminent danger.

Speaking of fights, they may be sparse but when they happen they are fast and furious and brutal, with a lot of wide shots and long takes making for very entertaining action sequences. Gina Carano may not be an actress, but she does have the magnetism that many other non actor action stars have, from Bruce Lee through to Schwarzenegger, and a physical presence that completely sells the action. She doesn't lose any fights, but she does take some brutal blows along the way. There's an impressive sequence where she's climbing and jumping along rooftops in long takes that aren't showy but are impressive for simply being her actually doing these things.

Carano isn't great in the talky scenes, nor is she bad; she seems just right for the tone and style of the film. The rest of the very impressive cast more than compensate for any deficiencies in the acting department with their performances, including when they get their asses handed to them at some point or the other in a brutal beat down!


Haywire is a very good action thriller that stands out from the crowd in the same way Hanna did last year (my review) by being a film that embraces the genre it represents while also transcending it in many ways. I guess an interesting and talented filmmaker can always bring something to the table, even when that table is a well worn and cliche ridden genre.

Winter's Bone (2010)

Image from IMP Awards

Winter's Bone (2010)

The critically acclaimed Winter's Bone, directed by Debra Granik and starring Jennifer Lawrence, is an atmospheric film set in a small community situated in the rural wilderness of the Ozark mountains. It is based on a novel (that I haven't read) that tells the story of a teenage girl named Ree (Lawrence) who looks after her impoverished family of two young siblings and a mentally unsound mother. Life's already a struggle, but when it comes to light that her drug manufacturing (think meth lab) father has disappeared days before being due to appear in court while leaving their family home as a bond, she embarks on a quest, one that forces her to grow up and fully bear the weight of being her family's matriarch.

Ree's quest - to find her father and get him to appear in court - forces her to become entangled with her sordid extended family and her father's nefarious associates; it is a quest that puts her life in danger. The narrative is slight - this is much more a film about character, setting, and atmosphere than about plot. The nature of this remote society with its idiosyncrasies and distinctive style of language are a large part of the film's appeal. The mystery isn't solved Sherlock Holmes style, instead it's based on vague second hand and unreliable information; the audience is just as blind as Ree as to what's actually going on, and we stumble along with her as the clock ticks away. What stands out is Ree's unwavering determination to save her family. In many ways the plot is incidental, with its conclusion flying in the face of narrative convention by not neatly wrapping things up. Contrary to what you'd expect there's nothing unsatisfying about this, and I'd cite it as a perfect example of how a plot isn't necessarily what a film is about.

Jennifer Lawrence is terrific in the lead role and there are a handful of character actors in this who round out a very good cast. It's visually and aurally stark and gloomy, reflecting the downbeat dreariness that flows through the community it depicts. It takes its time easing us into its setting but doesn't feel slow.

Having extolled its virtues, however, I confess it never really connected with me as much as I'd like. This admission notwithstanding I will say I'm glad I saw it; I found it rewardning and interesting and I'd urge anyone with more than a passing interest in films to check it out.

The Adjustment Bureau (2011)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Adjustment Bureau
Romance and sci-fi are not genres that sit well together very often, so chalk this one up as one of those rare exceptions. Based on a Phillip K Dick short story, it tells the story of a an impulsive politician, David Norris (Matt Damon), who on the eve of losing a Senatorial election meets a woman, Elise (Emily Blunt), in the men's (!) while rehearsing his concession speech. The two hit it off immediately and the inspired Norris subsequently knocks his speech out of the park.

Turns out this wasn't all random chance. A secret organisation of what appear to be angels are actually pulling the strings and directing the fate of mankind, including Norris's. His meeting with Elise was orchestrated. Unfortunately this 'Adjutsment Bureau' aren't perfect and a second unplanned encounter between the two puts their grand plans for Norris in jeopardy as the pair threaten to fall in love and alter their destinies.

The film is part romance and part sci-fi thriller, and while it never gets your pulse pounding it does tell its story very well. Much has been said by critics about how well Damon and Blunt play off each other, and it's true, they do - this seems to be half the battle in any kind of on screen love story, and in this the two make a believable pairing - helped along by some decent writing - which makes their dilemmas and choices feel earned instead of contrived. Damon's the star and his affable demeanor helps sell the premise together with the very capable supporting cast of agents/angels played by Anthony Mackie, the ever icy Terence Stamp and scene stealer John Slattery.

In an era of bigger is better blockbusters, Adjustment Bureau is defiantly low key. It never gets bogged down in its grand themes of fate vs free will (though it does raise the issues) and instead focuses on the characters. Nor does it try to be large scale in terms of action or effects, though there are very effective action sequences and some wonderfully understated effects. The mechanics of the Bureau are only explained as far as is necessary for the plot, and to be honest I never felt the need for any further explanation.

This isn't going to go down as a classic, but it achieves what it sets out to do very well. It's entertaining and charming and funny, and despite there never being a genuine sense of danger in the story it manages to remain consistently engaging and even somewhat thought provoking at times. I enjoyed it and it's definitely worth a watch, even for those without an inclination towards science fiction.

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Woah! This is the first Tarantino film that I've actually been blown away by, and is easily my favourite of his films (knocking Jackie Brown off the top spot). The film is, without giving anything away, a new take on World War II; and by that I mean an alternate history, one that is outrageously funny and enthralling from start to finish, with quite a few shocks thrown in for good measure.

Taking place 'once upon a time in Nazi occupied France', the film is divided into 5 'chapters' that follow several different interweaving story threads and characters. The titular 'Basterds' are a team of Jewish American soldiers led by Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) who drop in to France to dish out bloody vengeance upon the Nazis, taking no prisoners and causing Hitler a major headache. Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) is a rather clever Nazi put in charge of hunting down the remaining Jews in France, a task he is exceptionally proficient at. Mélanie Laurent plays a Jewish woman, Shosanna, who survives the massacre of her family and hides in plain sight in Paris as the owner of a cinema, one that through fortuitous circumstances draws the Basterds, the Nazi top brass, and Col. Landa together.

One thing 'Inglourious Basterds' is not - despite outward appearances - is an action film. Sure, it's got some action in it and it is a violent revenge story, but for the most part it is a very dialogue heavy film that is made up of protracted conversations. That shouldn't be a put off because it's a Tarantino film, and the way these chapters and scenes are written as almost stand alone self contained mini stories that still gel together as part of a cohesive broader narrative, together with the snappy dialogue, is simply brilliant. It's sometimes tense, sometimes funny, and always engaging, with every character being layered and distinctive, even the very minor ones who pop into the film for a scene or two. And some of these scenes are nerve wracking, ratcheting up the tension minute by minute and keeping you on the edge of your seat. While the plot seems there to serve the characters, it's still excellent, albeit one that clearly takes place in an alternate, slightly surreal reality.

Of course, a great script doesn't equate to a great film without performances to go with it, and in this case the ensemble cast is uniformly excellent, with the standout being Waltz's ruthlessly brilliant and oddly amusing (and occasionally laugh out loud hilarious) and foppish Col. Landa. Sure, he gets the best lines in the film, but the delivery is simply fantastic. The rest of the cast is also in tune with the writing, playing it straight or slightly OTT as appropriate. Brad Pitt is great as Raine, a character that is unabashedly comical in nature, while at the other end of the spectrum Laurent's Jewish survivor is a much more serious and tragic character. There are also terrific minor standouts littered throughout the film, too many to really list out. The only weak link is a jarring appearance by Mike Myers, but I suppose it's only a problem if you're familiar with Mike Myers.

Everything about this film is praiseworthy, from the stylish visuals and editing to the music. One could argue that it runs a bit long, and in truth many of the scenes could easily be trimmed without detracting from the overall story, but part of the joy of watching this film is to witness these characters interacting and engaging in verbal combat, so in my mind the length is more a strength than a weakness! Inglourious Basterds is irreverent, occasionally extremely violent, and overall flat out brilliant and almost certainly unlike anything else you've seen before! Like I said, it's my favourite Tarantino film and among the most enjoyable cinematic experiences of the year for me. It makes me want to go back and re-watch all of his films again, just to reassess them!


[I'm not sure if I've come out of retirement here or not - this might be a one-off. Man, I'm rusty!]

Black Book (2006)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Black Book (2006)

The gorgeous Carice van Houten is easily one of the main draws of 'Black Book', and not just because of her looks but because her stellar performance is the highlight of an otherwise unexceptional film. Van Houten plays Rachel Stein, a Jewish woman in the Netherlands during World War II who, after the brutal murder of her family, joins the Dutch resistance and infiltrates the Gestapo headquarters in The Hague. There she seduces the officer in charge, Ludwig Müntze (Sebastian Koch), but starts to fall for him when she realizes that he's actually a decent sort who likes to collect stamps instead of kill people. When the resistance uses her to try and help some captured prisoners while also trying to figure out who has been selling out Jews - like Rachel's parents - to the Nazis, she finds herself in an increasingly dangerous position.

Paul Verhoeven is the master of gratuitous violence, nudiy, and sex, and he doesn't dissapoint with this film, and neither does van Houten. Puerile elements aside, the journey Rachel goes through is harrowing and van Houten completely sells the character and her predicament, being sympathetic and convincing as a resourceful woman forced to go to extremes for the cause. She is by far and away the best thing about the film. The rest of it is pretty good as well but doesn't really fire on all cylinders; the film shifts somewhat uncomfortably between historical drama and cheesy action thriller, with the plotting and characterization often being more like a Hollywood summer blockbuster than a sober European war film. Some of the action scenes seem strangely surreal and at odds with the generally realistic tone the film usually maintains.

Having got those negatives out of the way, I can say that 'Black Book' is well acted and visually quite appealing, and while the writing may raise a few chuckles it is still strong enough to make for a gripping experience. As director, Verhoeven manages to conjure some tense scenes and more than a few horrific moments, as he often does, but there's very little in the way of overt humour in the film. Which is a shame, since black comedy is something the man does well, and it wouldn't have been especially jarring since the tone of the film is already fairly erratic.

Overall, a good film that comes across as more superficial and less weighty than most serious WWII movies; still, it's a fine piece of entertainment that features an excellent central performance to hold it together.

Death Proof (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Death Proof (2007)

'Death Proof' is Quentin Tarantino's half of the 'Grindhouse' double bill, with the other half being Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror. Tonally it comes across as more 'serious' than 'Planet Terror', and features a lot of the witty, verbose dialogue and character exchanges that Tarantino is famous for. The story is about a stunt man, Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russel), a serial killer who uses his specially rigged 'death proof' stunt car to kill women. Significant portions of the film are devoted to introducing Stuntman Mike's victims - in fact I'd say the majority of the film focuses on the women - who are played by a selection of luscious ladies including Rosario Dawson, Rose McGowan, Sydney Poitier, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and stuntwoman Zoe Bell as herself. Quentin Tarantino also has a bit part as a bartender.

The character exchanges are fun but seem to go on for a bit (this is the standalone international version, which is about 25 minutes longer than the original 'double bill' cut). I didn't much care for the semi serious tone of what is essentially meant to be a B-movie - the quality of the film is just too high for it to be a real grindhouse flick, and most of the actors are, ironically, too good in their roles. Kurt Russell is the exception, it must be said, because he seems to relish going over the top as the sadistic stuntman. Zoe Bell is also a laugh and terrific in the action scenes where she is obviously doing her own (dangerous) stunts.

Overall, it's not as fun as Planet Terror but still quite different and worth a watch, especially for fans of Tarantino's work. I'm not that big a fan of the guy to be honest, and this isn't one of his best efforts, but it's still fairly enjoyable stuff.

Get away from her you BITCH!*

Ever since reading this chap's spot-on review of Aliens, I had the movie stuck in my head - it was demanding to be watched! And so, watch it I did, and I was once again struck by how involving the film was despite the fact that it held no surprises for me. One of the best sci-fi action films ever made, and one everyone should watch (after watching part 1, that is). No full review here, because I just don't have the time to do it justice... Just watch the damned thing already!

*If you've seen the movie, you know what this line is all about!

Shoot 'Em Up (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Shoot 'Em Up (2007)

I'm a fan of Clive Owen, an actor who I think has an interesting and varied filmography; he tends to bring a cocky presence to all of his films (except, perhaps, Children of Men), and in 'Shoot 'Em Up' he really gets to crank that persona up to 11! Owen plays 'Smith', a man who at the start of the film reluctantly gets caught up in a shoot out, one in which he gets to deliver a baby amidst a hail of bullets! These opening scenes prepare you for what to expect from the film, which just continuously escalates its madness level. Entrusted with taking care of the baby, Smith turns to a lactating prostitute (yes, really) named DQ (Monica Bellucci) for help while running from the villainous decent family man Hertz (Paul Giamatti), who represents a group with a vested interest in killing the baby. Hertz always arrives on the scene with a seemingly endless army of thugs who obligingly provide target practice for the uber badass and completely unstoppable Smith.

Seriously, the action in here is so over the top that words cannot do it justice - if the baby delivery shootout sounds over the top, wait till you see the shootout / sex scene combo! This really is a live action cartoon, a fact alluded to by the completely overt references to Smith being Bugs Bunny (he eats carrots all the time, and in one scene says 'What's up doc?'). In between quarreling with DQ and dodging the scheming Hertz, Smith triest to find out why the baby is important enough for someone to expend so much effort to kill him. The revelation, when it finally arrives, is as fittingly goofy as everything else in the film!

Owen is great in the role, naturally. He's angry, violent, and completely badass. Monica Bellucci is sleazier than I've ever seen her, but still hot, and does a decent job in a fairly crude role. Paul Giamatti is every bit Owen's equal, the intellectual Elmer Fudd to Owen's arrogant Bugs (tell me you don't see it, go on!), and his calm scheming is every bit as enjoyable as watching him lose his cool every time Smith slips through his fingers.

The film is generally on overdrive all the way through, and is very much in the vein of Crank in that it is unabashedly crude, violent, and made purely for thrills. If you're not hooked within the first 10 minutes, then I can safely say it's not for you. The trailer, if I recall correctly, was a fair representation of the final film. There's nothing brilliant about 'Shoot 'Em Up' but it's quite good at doing what it says on the tin, and worth seeing if you're into this burgeoning sub-genre of insane action! I for one dug it, it's one of those films where I found myself grinning the whole way through!

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)

Since I reviewed the first two, I feel compelled to finish my trilogy of reviews by writing this one up. It's going to be brief, however.

The first two Mummy films weren't exactly masterpieces of cinema, but they got a lot right - they were simple, straightforward stories with charming characters, humour, a sense of adventure, and an epic scope backed by a surfeit of (admittedly cheesy) special effects. Despite being derivative, they had an identity of their own and, surprisingly, managed to be quite memorable. Sadly this latest installment rounds out the series (I hope) with an attempted bang that comes across as more of a whimper.

Set some years after 'Mummy Returns', 'Dragon Emperor' finds Rick (Brendan Fraser) and Evey (Mario Bello standing in for Rachel Weisz) O'Connell reluctantly retired from adventuring while their son Alex (Luke Ford) is out secretly digging up mummies in China when he's supposed to be getting an education. Naturally, when the mummy of Emperor Han (Jet Li) is accidentally awakened and tries to take over the world, Rick and Evey come out of retirement and join Alex in China to stop him, and drag Evey's brother Johnathan (John Hannah) along. Aiding our heroes in their quest are two mysterious Chinese women (played by Michelle Yeoh and Isabella Leong) who seem to know a lot about what's going on.

Alright, I haven't really gone into much detail about the plot, but it's mostly irrelevant so that's all you really need to know. In films like these it's mostly the execution that counts - the characterization, the writing, the set pieces, the music, and so on. And in most respects 'Emperor' is decent, but suffers from feeling wholly derivative of not just the previous Mummy films but also of so many other classics of the genre; watching it is akin to watching some sort of retrospective 'Best Adventure Films' documentary. This series of films has never felt particularly original or consequential, but they never before felt quite as light and superfluous as this one either (though I can't really remember all that much of 'Scorpion King', truth be told). And while they were predictable, the first two parts had a whimsical charm that only occasionally crops up here, and this is largely because of the absence of the wonderful Rachel Weisz (who worked so well with Fraser) and the presence of the now strangely annoying John Hannah.

What about the action and adventure elements then? In addition to being derivative - not a fatal flaw in itself - they just aren't all particularly engaging. I wasn't expecting a sense of genuine danger here, mind you, just some inventiveness and humour, but alas, it doesn't even deliver enough to meet my moderate expectations. The effects and production values are fine, however, and are about par for the course. The cast is fairly decent but lacks the spark that made the earlier films - where even very minor roles were well cast and acted - such good fun. Admittedly, part of the reason is that the characters aren't written as well, and have little in the way of a personal story that fits in to the bigger picture.

I don't mean to sound too negative, as this is actually a fairly decent film and I think in many respects superior to the borderline bad 'Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'. It's just that while I enjoyed it, it didn't make me want to revisit it any time soon. I must of course confess at this point that I didn't like 'Returns' the first time I saw it either, but that was more a reaction to the wanton excess of that film than to any serious failings on its part (though, wanton excess can be a serious failing as well, I suppose!). Recommended for completists of the series only, or those who somehow avoided Dr Jones.

The Dark Knight (2008)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Dark Knight (2008)

After smashing virtually every significant box office record known to man or bat, 'The Dark Knight' wasted little time in establishing itself as the biggest film of the year. Director Christopher Nolan's follow up to his excellent 'Batman Begins' is a phenomenon not just in terms of raking in the moola but also in terms of critical cred, with the Rotten Tomatoes review aggregator giving it a 94% fresh rating. So, does this cinematic behemoth live up to all of the hype and expectation? Well, sort of - there are some caveats.

Set a year after the events in 'Begins', 'Dark Knight' establishes early on that Batman (Christian Bale) has spent that time cleaning up much of Gotham City. He has teamed up with Detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), who now heads his own special hand picked unit within the Police Department, and together they've been cracking down on organized crime. Meanwhile Gotham's dashing new District Attorney, Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), proves to be an unlikely ally, a man who really is as noble and virtuous as his nickname, the 'White Knight', suggests. As these three men slowly tighten the noose around the remnants of the criminal underworld, billionaire Bruce Wayne begins to believe that he can soon retire Batman for good and leave the city in the capable hands of Gordon and Dent. He hopes to reunite with his old flame Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal), despite the minor fact that she is - to his chagrin - with Dent. Of course, this wouldn't be much of a story if things went according to plan, and the unexpected and rapid rise to power of a twisted criminal psycopath calling himself the Joker (Heath Ledger) acts as the spanner in the works; the Joker's intelligence and ruthlessness make him a deadly foe, and he sets about systematically bringing Gotham City to its knees.

That summary only skims the intricate plot as there are so many little substories and characters in the mix that it's a minor miracle the film manages to stay as coherent as it does. It's an incredibly layered story that touches on every conceivable aspect of Gotham society. In many ways 'Dark Knight' is less a superhero film and more a crime thriller that just happens to take place in Gotham City and feature Batman and the Joker as major characters. This is made evident right from the opening scene that depicts a thrilling bank robbery that would have been just as at home in a non superhero film (and apparently it was inspired by Michael Mann's 'Heat').

Also made evident from the outset is the unrestrained brutality and capriciousness that permeates the film - anyone who thought the first one was dark is in for a surprise. Nolan's decision to keep things reality based continues, with far out technology and over the top action set pieces making themselves felt only sparingly. Unfortunately, there are a couple of techie elements that are completely over the top (one involving mobile phones that comes across as a clumsy commentary on privacy rights) that they take you right out of the film, sort of like the first film's moisture vapourizer device. Fortunately the focus is almost always on character, drama, and plot, the film's true strengths, and not faux technology. Also worth noting is that the city of Gotham is, for perhaps the first time, realistic instead of stylized, which also helps instill a sense of this being a conventional drama and not a comic book tale.

Which brings me to one of my problems with the film - the fight scenes. While they flow naturally as an integral part of the story, the hand to hand combat scenes that crop up quite regularly are surprisingly mediocre. It's almost like Nolan had to meet a quota of fisticuffs and threw in repetitive scenes of Batman punching people to meet it. Even the vehicular combat scenes are sometimes a tad underwhelming. This is a relatively minor quibble however, as much of the build up and action is tense and thrilling, but a noticeable one nonetheless.

A dark atmosphere enshrouds the entire film, from the lighting to the production design right down to the dour expression on Christian Bale's chiseled visage, but as the death toll rises and hope fades for our heroes the script still manages to throw in a few comedic quips here and there, and while not all of them work they do prevent the whole enterprise from becoming a frown fest. Another aspect worthy of praise is how even minor characters are well drawn out and memorable, a combination of good casting and writing. The main characters are infused with surprising amounts of depth given how busy the film is in general, and their individual storylines bring to the fore the film's themes of hope and sacrifice in the face of overwhelming corruption and anarchy, as well as playing around with the concept of duality (in one case, quite literally). The story deals directly with the concept of good being overwhelmed by evil, but manages to make situations murky and complex instead of clear cut, although I can't help but question some of Batman's views on his right to use any means he deems necessary!

The plot twists and turns, which brings me to another problem - the excess of schemes! The film is a tad too long and could have done without quite so many overly clever schemes by the Joker; the excess cheapens the effect and by the end one almost feels completely unsurprised when the Joker 'surprises' everyone for the umpteenth time. It's to the film's credit then that the Joker's final scheme is still gripping despite the fact that everyone knew one was coming.

The performance everyone's been talking about is that of the late Heath Ledger as the Clown Prince of Crime, and it really is phenomenal. Ledger is almost unrecognizable, and not just because of the makeup. At no point does the Joker seem like anything less than an unhinged maniac ready to go off, but at the same time he manages to appear both brilliant and disturbingly likable (or maybe that's just me). You can call it showy, but everything from the odd mannerisms to the sneering voice are absolutely spot on, and I think it's hard to argue against the notion that this is the definitive live action incarnation of the character; it's easy to see why some are calling Ledger's Joker one of the all time great villains of cinema.

While ostensibly the star of the film, Christian Bale is much more subdued than the others around him; don't get me wrong, he's pretty good in the dual role of Batman and Bruce Wayne, but both of those characters are overshadowed by the Joker, Dent, and even Gordon. And, there is something a little off about his face as Batman - he looks a little chunky, and there's something odd about the way his mouth hangs open when he talks! Gary Oldman makes the most of a supporting role to make Gordon an upright, tough and resourceful policeman pushed to his limits by the madness around him, while Aron Eckhart uses the natural charisma that made him such a likable sleezebag in 'Thank You For Smoking' to good effect to make Harvey Dent believable despite being impossibly noble. The four principal actors head a cast that also includes the likes of Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Maggie Gyllenhaal and many others, all of whom do solid work.

There are some other minor quibbles that I ought to raise - the gruff voice of Batman works at times but seems strangely out of place at others; the music is decent if unmemorable, though the disconcerting music that accompanies the Joker is a memorable highlight; and the plot, with all its twists and turns, might not hold up under close scrutiny during repeat viewings. These are relatively minor flaws in an otherwise very good film, easily one of the best superhero films yet made and a worthy successor to 'Batman Begins' that improves upon it in nearly every way. It's one of those rarities that manages to satisfy as an action film without being dumbed down and without sacrificing character or thematic depth. It's not the masterpiece that some seem to be calling it, but it is very good, and well worth any movie fan's time!

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

Paul Greengrass returned to direct the second sequel in the Bourne series, the follow up to his excellent 'Supremacy', and he picks up virtually exactly where the last one left off... well, sorta, since the epilogue from the last film takes place in the middle of this one (not as confusing as it sounds). Anyway, if the first film was about Bourne (Matt Damon) discovering what he was, and the second about changing and trying to atone in some small way, then the third is about Bourne trying to discover his origins and bring to an end his involvement with the CIA. Through a newspaper reporter (Paddy Considine), Bourne learns of a new organization within the CIA, Blackbriar, that runs the programme he was a part of. Blackbriar is run by a man named Noah Vosen (David Strathairn), and when it learns of Bourne's presence it enlists Pamela Landy (Joan Allen) to help capture him. Landy is, however, suspicious of Blackbriar and sympathetic towards Bourne based on their past encounters. Bourne's journey leads him to various locales in Europe, Africa, and the US, and he once again encounters operative Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) in the course of events. Of course, his visits to these places don't stop at mere sightseeing, but instead entail car chases, foot chases, spying, bullets aplenty and some old fashioned fisticuffs.

All of the elements that made the first two films so great are now honed to perfection - 'Ultimatum' really fires on all cylinders. It's storytelling style is incredibly economical, and it hurtles along at a relentless pace from start to finish. Admittedly some of the finer plot points don't really hold together that well, and it could be argued that Bourne has now ascended into a wholly robotic action machine. I don't think this is a bad thing though; from a characterization point of view I can see why Bourne might be colder and more inured to his life and past, and there are still some key moments where his feelings on what he has done and what he is peek out. For the most part the atmosphere sticks to the unshowy, perfunctory style that is a hallmark of these films, one that makes it much easier to suspend disbelief when required. There's a grounded in reality feel throughout, from the stark photography and locales to the look of the offices and the people populating them, right down to their wardrobes. There's rarely a sense that choices in this movie were made purely to appear cool.

Matt Damon is again terrific as Bourne, both physically and in terms of demeanour. There's an unwavering confidence about him now, and in the action scenes he is completely believable as an unstoppable super agent. The supporting cast is also excellent, with Joan Allen, Strathairn, and Stiles delivering in key roles and Paddy Considine making his bit part into something compelling and memorable. Greengrass once again employs his pseudo documentary style to good effect in his directing of the film; it's not going to win over people who hated it in Supermacy, but I reckon it's one of those choices that elevates these films above its ilk. Greengrass also does well to make everything hold together despite the ludicrous pace and sheer number of incidents that come flying at the viewer. There's always cohesion and a sense that it all clicks despite appearing that it might fly off the rails at any moment!

Bottom line, great performances and storytelling make for a great film, one that takes the character to new places (including a startling revelation!) and ups the thrills and action; it feels true to the earlier films without feeling overly familiar. The thematic throughline of the lone man against the oppressive and corrupt system is always compelling, and the Bourne series does it about as well as it has ever been done, at least in terms of action thrillers. 'Ultimatum' makes for a fitting conclusion to the story arc started in 'Identity' so I'm not sure where they'd take it from here in another sequel, but if Greengrass and Damon return for another Bourne outing (they're currently working together on 'Green Zone') you can bet your bottom dollar it'll make my 'must see' list!

Planet Terror (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Planet Terror (2007)

'Planet Terror' is director Robert Rodriguez's half of the 'Grindhouse' double bill, with the other half, 'Death Proof', being directed by Quentin Tarantino.

'Grindhouse' is meant to be a homage to the type of films shown as grindhouse features. From Wikipedia:

The film's name originates from the American term for theaters that played "all the exploitation genres: kung fu, horror, Giallo, sexploitation, the "good old boy" redneck car-chase movies, blaxploitation, spaghetti Westerns—all those risible genres that were released in the 70s." According to Rodriguez, "The posters were much better than the movies, but we're actually making something that lives up to the posters."

This film is certainly not as low budget as those it seeks to pay tribute to, but it's made to look like a trashy exploitation flick complete with dodgy effects and poor quality, degraded 'film' reels. The story is about a chemical weapon being unleashed on a small town that turns people into zombies. A small group of people band together to try and survive, while an elite military unit gets up to no good behind the scenes.

Rodriguez is right in that his film really does live up to the posters! I haven't actually watched any real grindhouse flicks, but I'm fairly certain that they are a lot crappier than the faux crappiness on display here. The film is outrageous - gory, over the top, and very funny, and the wacky atmosphere and artificially cheap looking visuals add to the film's entertainment value. It's a tad too long (though, I did watch the extended standalone version of the film), but still makes for a thrilling ride.

And although it's all meant to look cheap, the effects and production values are surprisingly impressive in their own kitschy way. There are some fun performances in there as well, especially from Naveen Andrews (Sayid from Lost!), Rose McGowan, and Michael (where has he been?) Biehn.

I'm not sure if I can really recommend 'Planet Terror' to a casual movie fan, as it's definitely out there and a little bit absurd. But if you can embrace its intentional cheapness, there's a lot of fun to be had.

28 Days Later (2002)

(Image from IMP Awards)


28 Days Later (2002)

Danny Boyle and Alex Garland's once unconventional take on the zombie genre was at the time of release fresh and invigorating - speedy zombies! Watching it again years later, however, it's clear that this one is not just a one trick pony - it's a little bit special and will endure for years to come.

Following a brief and rather shaky prologue the film proper begins mysteriously enough, with a man named Jim (Cillian Murphy) waking up in an abandoned hospital. He walks out and discovers a deserted London, a scenario that is revealed in hauntingly dramatic fashion. Most of the populace has fled, and he soon discovers why; the remainder have become the 'infected' - people who are essentially zombies - and have overrun Britain. After surviving his first harrowing encounter with the infected, Jim ends up with fellow survivors Selena (Naomie Harris), Frank (Brendan Gleeson), and Frank's daughter Hannah (Megan Burns). Hearing transmissions from the military telling them that there is a safe haven in Manchester, they set out across the desolate landscape in Frank's car, braving the possibility of being attacked by the infected.

A simple yet interesting premise, and one that is extremely well executed. After the iffy prologue the subsequent first two acts of the film are superb. The sense of desolation is palpable and the isolation permeates nearly every scene. The scenario is made believable by being unremittingly bleak and hopeless. The zombies generate a genuine feeling of terror, and the film doesn't hold back when it comes to delivering shocks and gruesome gore either. The best part though is that despite the bleakness there are several moments that are poignant and joyful, such as the scene where our heroes raid a supermarket with the gleeful enthusiasm of participating in a shopping spree.

The characters are complex, fallible, and very vulnerable - basically, human. This impression is created in large part by the excellent performances from the four leads, who generate a convincing sense of camaraderie. The bemused and delicate looking Murphy makes for an atypical lead who guides us through the shock and horror of what has happened. The character also makes an incredible transformation towards the end, one that is actually quite over the top but which Murphy manages to pull off. Speaking of the end, the last act takes the film into interesting territory but I didn't find it to be as well executed as what came before. A whole new bunch of characters are introduced and the tone of the film becomes twisted and sinister, and also somewhat comical. The cast members who show up here, including Christopher Eccleston, are all very good in their roles, but it still feels a bit incongruous and jarring.

While the final act - which ironically is somehow more bizarre than the stuff with the zombies - is a slight let down in terms of execution, it doesn't drag the film down too much, and it does provide a compelling commentary on the fragility of society and the simplicity with which people can descend into barbarism. The psychological aspects of the film ring true, and are also a part of what make this better than your average zombie flick.

Boyle is a filmmaker who doesn't seem to be limited by genre, and '28 Days Later' demonstrates his versatility by being effective as both a character piece and an edgy post apocalyptic horror film. There's a haunting beauty in the hellish nightmare world he creates, and despite the annoying digital video look in the early scenes the film delivers some captivating visuals. Those early shots of a deserted London are iconic. The horror elements are also well done, with tense and suspenseful scenes leading in to explosive moments of action. And yes, even the incongruous comedy elements are quite funny! The zombies themselves aren't all that impressive visually but they make up for it with their wild and unsettling behaviour, charging at people with manic rage and impressive speed.

I can't finish this review without mentioning the very cool and distinctive soundtrack, which complements the film well.

Overall, it's a very good film that lets itself down towards the end but still makes a strong, lasting overall impression by being absorbing and thought provoking, and by featuring characters worth giving a damn about. Quite, quite unlike its risible sequel.

Crank (2006)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Crank (2006)

'Crank' is an improbably entertaining movie. It's as high concept as it gets - professional assassin Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) is injected with a poison by gangster Verona (Jose Pablo Cantillo) that will kill him slowly; it is also debilitating unless he keeps his adrenaline level high. The story that ensues is basically a race to find a cure and take revenge, with Chev being hyper and excited the whole time and doing insane things to maintain enough adrenaline in his system to keep the poison at bay. Also along for the ride are Chev's girlfriend Eve (Amy Smart) and his snide doctor, Doc Miles (Dwight Yoakam).

Much like its protagonist, the film has a surfeit of adrenaline flowing through it from start to finish. The outrageous plot is not half bad given that it's basically designed to get Chev from one ludicrous scenario to the next. It features lean storytelling that is fully committed to its premise; it's also completely irreverent, with a hero who is a remorseless, amoral killer willing to do whatever it takes to survive. And while the movie is action packed and full of violence - there are car chases and shootouts aplenty - it is also very funny, with a darkly comedic tone throughout. If you think about the premise, the inherent comedy value of a guy doing anything to stay excited ought to be self evident. And Chev stops at nothing to stay frantic, including having sex with his girlfriend in a public place in front of a throng of cheering onlookers!

In many ways 'Crank' has the feel of a video game, with stylistic flourishes that seem to evoke the GTA series, and it even references video games directly on a few occasions. The action is exciting, with inventive sequences, snappy editing and kinetic camerawork; there's also an interesting use of first person / odd camera perspectives and sometimes bizarre on screen text. Overall, with its colourful visuals and thumping soundtrack, the film is quite successful at making the viewer maintain the same level of excitement as its hero! Jason Statham is by no means a great actor but he has his niche and is perfect in this sort of role - he's an explosive presence and has always exuded an air of barely contained rage, and this film allows him to unleash it. Amy Smart is also smokin and strangely sweet as his dumb blonde girlfriend. Dwight Yoakam is hilarious as the Doc who seems like he's just wandered onto the set by mistake. The rest of the actors make for a colourful lineup and round out an effective cast.

Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor crafted an inventive and exhilarating experience with 'Crank', one that I thought might be somewhat fun but which ended up leaving me wearing a pretty big grin throughout its runtime! Sure it's daft as hell, but it isn't ashamed of that fact at all - in fact, it embraces it! I'm quite curious to see how the forthcoming sequel will turn out; needless to say, it's on my to watch list!

Jekyll (2007)

(Image from Amazon)


Jekyll (2007)

I've fallen behind on these reviews, so this is going to be brief.

I've praised writer Stephen Moffat before several times on this blog, and was thrilled to hear that he was working with Spielberg and Jackson on Tintin. So it's quite disappointing to find that his mini-series 'Jekyll', based on the Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde story, is not upto the standard I was expecting. It's overlong and drags badly, feels repetitive and has some lame twists and turns, is populated by poorly written characters, and features some rather lame comedy beats. In fact, the supporting characters are almost uniformly unappealing, especially the lame lesbian detective team and the villains. The story isn't bad, being a sort of modern day 'continuation' of Stephenson's classic book, but there's such an insistence on Americanizing things with cheesy covert agencies and evil 'Americans' with terrible accents. It just tries too hard. To be fair, it's not all the fault of the writing, as some of the blame must go to the too flashy direction, cheap visuals, and average performances. And the soundtrack is just horrendous; I rarely feel this way but I was wishing there was a way to simply turn off the music, particularly the grating main theme!

The show isn't bad, however - it has a secret weapon, one that elevates it to watchable. That weapon is James Nesbitt, who is simply brilliant as both Dr. Jackman and the villainous Hyde. His transformation is so incredible that it's hard to believe it's the same man! While his portrayal of the good Doctor is great - desperate, tired, but full of resolve - it's his turn as the insanely maniacal and charismatic Hyde that thrills. Superb stuff, a performance that makes you forget the show's weaknesses. Ultimately however his work is simply not enough to elevate 'Jekyll' to anything above decent, but without it I can't imagine I'd have sat through more than an episode. As it stands, I wouldn't say it's worth watching - in fact, the critical love this has received beggars belief - but perhaps it's worth checking out the first episode, just to see Nesbitt in action!

Medium - Season 2 (2005-2006)

(Image from Amazon)


Medium - Season 2 (2005-2006)

I wrote a fairly comprehensive review of Medium's first season, and really so little changes in the second that there's nothing new to say. It's business as usual. Which is actually something of a problem when the first season was already threatening to be formulaic; now, it unquestionably is. All of the pluses are still there, and it's certainly very well made, but it is undeniably 'comfort TV', the type of show where you know exactly what you're going to get with no surprises. The plot twists lack any real zing. I still enjoyed it, but when there's no overall story arc or change in the formula, it becomes repetitive pretty fast. Especially when there are 22 episodes in the season! The show is good enough to warrant watching another season (I think), but if the creative team don't shake things up a little in Season 3, I can't imagine staying around for the fourth...

The X-Files - Fight the Future (1998)

(Image from Wikipedia)


The X-Files - Fight the Future (1998)

I'm the key figure in an ongoing government charade, the plot to conceal the truth about the existence of extraterrestrials. It's a global conspiracy, actually, with key players in the highest levels of power, that reaches down into the lives of every man, woman, and child on this planet, so, of course, no one believes me. I'm an annoyance to my superiors, a joke to my peers. They call me Spooky. Spooky Mulder, whose sister was abducted by aliens when he was just a kid and who now chases after little green men with a badge and a gun, shouting to the heavens or to anyone who will listen that the fix is in, that the sky is falling and when it hits it's gonna be the shit-storm of all time. - Fox Mulder

Ah, Fox Mulder - if ever there was a geek character who made the big time on television, it's him (though, I guess Dale Cooper comes pretty close!). And then there's his "skeptical beyond belief and in the face of overwhelming evidence" partner Scully. What a team they were, in a show that brought sci-fi and the supernatural to the mainstream without compromising good, intelligent writing and edgy thrills. The movie version of 'The X-Files' came out between the show's fifth and sixth seasons and was a pretty high profile release (despite it's modest box office), and watching it again after all these years it strikes me as a very strong extension of the show that remains faithful while being reasonably accessible to people going in cold.

The byzantine plot involves a conspiracy by Federal Agency FEMA (yeah right, after Katrina I doubt these guys could conspire to pull off a surprise birthday party) to hide the existence of extra terrestrials, whom they have been working with for decades towards sinister ends. When an alien virus hidden on earth for millennia gets out and results in a massive cover up, FBI Agents Fox Mulder (David Duchovy) and Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) get on the case and start digging. Mulder is aided by a possibly deluded conspiracy theorist named Alvin Kurtzweil (Martin Landau) as he searches for answers. Time is not on our heroes' side as an FBI Committee investigates the two of them, which prompts Scully to consider resigning; things don't get any better when their lives are placed in jeopardy as they start to get some answers. Along for the ride in this cinematic outing are a host of regulars from the show, such as the Lone Gunmen, Director Skinner (Mitch Pileggi), and of course everyone's favourite villain, the Cigarette Smoking Man (William B. Davis).

The film really does feel like a lengthy episode of the show, only with a bigger playing field. It's actually a pretty good balancing act in terms of style, never feeling too big or grand until the massive finale, which truth be told doesn't work all that well. For the most part it sticks to the dark alleys, autopsy rooms, secret meetings between old men, exploration of strange locations, and banter between Mulder and Scully, and the storytelling is fairly gripping when it does. It's hard to say if a non fan will find any of this engaging, but the script goes some way towards making the plot as standalone as possible. The relationships between characters and their history, however, are obviously not reintroduced and may be confusing to newbies, but I think the gaps can be filled in reasonably well by the astute viewer. The dialogue style is as strong as on the show, with no pandering, and the plot twists and turns without slowing down and without any dumbing down either. The story picks up on elements from the series but fortunately doesn't rely on them, and I think overall the story is momentous enough to justify a cinematic outing; there are some impressively big moments in here, like the building explosion at the start, the cornfield chase, and some of the alien stuff towards the end.

The production values are raised above those of the show, as are the set pieces, but the performances are perfectly in tune with what was established in the series. Duchovny and Anderson wear Mulder and Scully like second skins, and they play the material to perfection. As do all of the regular supporting actors, even if their presence is perfunctory and adds very little to the story besides being fan service. Martin Landau was inspired casting as the odd, paranoid, but trustworthy man in the know, and his scenes with Duchovny are great. William B. Davis as the Smoking Man is, well, his usual nonchalant self - I was never that big a fan of the character, but he plays the role well.

As a film on its own, it's not mind blowing, but for fans it's as good a TV to big screen transfer as could have been hoped for. It works reasonably well on its own but is best viewed as something complementary to the series. The denoument is perhaps frustrating in that it presents limited closure, instead serving as a launching point for the sixth series, and it's also somewhat jarringly grand in scale for the X-Files; I can let that slide because it's not bad per se and because everything leading upto the finale is pretty good. Overall the film is worth watching for X-Files fans, especially those in anticipation of the forthcoming sequel, 'I Want to Believe'.

The Mist (Director's Black and White Edition) (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Mist (Director's Black and White Edition) (2007)

The best Stephen King adapter around, Frank Darabont (he of 'The Shawshank Redemption' and 'The Green Mile' fame), brought yet another of King's tales to the big screen last year. Though 'The Mist' came and went with little fanfare, Darabont delivered with aplomb for the third successive time by turning King's writing into an excellent film.

It's quite a simple set up - in a small town in Maine, a strange mist appears after a storm, and within it exist strange and dangerous creatures who enjoy munching on man flesh. The film focuses on a group of people who barricade themselves in a supermarket and fight to keep the monsters out. Among the survivors are level headed artist David Drayton (Thomas Jane) and his young son Billy (Nathan Gamble), Judge Brent Norton (Andre Braugher), schoolteacher Amanda Dumfries (Laurie Holden), nutty religious fanatic Mrs. Carmody (Marcia Gay Harden), and simpleton supermarket employee Jim (William Sadler), amongst many others. Their situation starts off quite shakily with the different personalities having trouble getting along and working together. As their situation becomes bleaker, two groups form, one trying to find rational solutions to their dilemma, and the other, larger group giving into despair and following the religious ramblings of Mrs. Carmody, whose power and influence rises with shocking speed.

I'm not sure how accurate the screenplay is to the novella, but the story develops very nicely indeed, wasting no time setting up all the pieces on the board but also never rushing to throw cheap thrills at the audience just for the sake of it. The monster elements are introduced in memorable ways and build up to some terrific and horrifying sequences throughout the film. And the ending is a real whopper, a punch to the gut that leaves you reeling. The characters are well fleshed out given the context and type of film; most are quite believable but a few are a tad exaggerated and some behaviour is a little contrived in order to drive the plot, but these problems are minor and easily overlooked. The dialogue is quite good if a little too didactic and clunky at times. Overall though, Darabont's screenplay is very good and is characterized by interesting thematic material.

As a simple horror film, 'The Mist' works very well. But it has a bit more going on besides monsters. Or rather, it depicts more than one kind of monster, with the second kind being the one trapped inside the supermarket. Society viewed in a microcosm is always an excellent narrative device if done right, and here it works brilliantly. In the early stages the story plays on class divides and personality clashes, but things take an interesting turn after some time passes and hope of rescue begins to fade. People begin to give in to their hopelessness and turn to the blathering Mrs. Carmody, whose readings from the Bible seem to give them something to hold on to at the expense of reason. Her rise in stature fuels her confidence, resulting in the situation becoming more extreme as she exploits people's fear to turn them to her side and to turn her side against the few - including David Drayton and Amanda Dumfries - who refuse to defer to her. Admittedly the story requires the presence of the extreme character of Mrs. Carmody to hasten events, but that's storytelling for you, and despite being contrived the rapid disintegration of civilized behaviour is still frighteningly believable! If the world seemed to be coming to an end, it isn't that far fetched to assume that people's violent, primal instincts would take over. This cynicism permeates the entire film, with even the 'good' people being painted in shades of grey.

Darabont injects into the film an atmosphere of genuine dread and fear, fear derived both from the mist and from the delicate situation inside the supermarket. The film is relentlessly bleak and has a really wicked capriciousness, dispatching people without restraint. The tension and dread are palpable, and the black and white photography seems ideal for the film's tone and a perfect accompaniment to its misty visuals, and it also helps sell the admittedly sub par effects (which looked far worse in the colour trailers I've seen). The film is sparse when it comes to music, relying more on sound effects and only occasionally switching to a moody score and some mournful vocals. While Darabont proves more than a little adept at the monster horror stuff, his track record in creating compelling films about people is maintained here. The film is great as a drama, with terrific performances all round and moments of genuine terror created by both the beasts and the humans! And before you think it's all doom and gloom, there are some moments of humour here and there that relieve the pressure.

Thomas Jane, a very good actor and one I've always liked (see Stander), has probably never been better than he is here as a decent, intelligent everyman thrust into horrible circumstances and forced to rise to the occasion. And no, that isn't nearly as cheesy as it sounds as he runs the emotional gamut while trying to help everyone and take care of his son. Marcia Gay Harden is the perfect counterpoint to Jane as the frightening Mrs. Carmody - she's over the top and hysterical, but epitomizes the type of fanatic who uses pseudo logic, unwavering conviction, and nonsensical morality to persuade the gullible and the desperate. Laurie Holden is fairly good as the good natured schoolteacher, while William Sadler and Toby Jones are excellent as supermarket employees who wind up on opposite sides of the divide. Last but not least, Andre Braugher is terrific and very funny (in a tragic way) as the pompous, arrogant judge Brent Norton.

At the end of the day, 'The Mist' is a breath of fresh air - a horror film for adults featuring adults, one with thematic depth and something to say that still manages to cram in more suspense, drama, and really horrific moments than most of the genre pretenders out there that settle for gore and loud sounds. The best horror films are ultimately about people, and this is something Darabont gets absolutely right (as does King). The concept may sound uninspired, but the film shakes off the notion that it's just another cliched horror film very early on. I loved it, and can't recommend it highly enough!

Red Heat (1988)

(Image from Wikipedia)


Red Heat (1988)

Arnold Schwarzenegger plays Russian Police Captain Ivan Danko in this late eighties action comedy. The story has Danko tracking a Russian drug dealer, Viktor Rostavili (Ed O'Ross), to Chicago and reluctantly teaming up with Detective Sgt. Art Ridzik (Jim Belushi). Both men are mavericks who cause considerable amounts of trouble with their aggressive 'result oriented' styles, which pisses off Police Commander Donnelly (Peter Boyle) and Lt. Stobbs (Laurence 'Larry' Fishburne). Also in the mix is Viktor's dance teacher wife Catherine (Gina Gershon). As the investigation progresses both men end up developing personal reasons to pursue and bring Viktor to justice (i.e. lay him to rest six feet under), and are forced to go up against a dangerous gang working for their nemesis as they shoot and drive their way recklessly across Chicago.

The film is fairly typical for the genre, and if you've ever seen a buddy cop slash fish out of water action comedy before, you'll know what to expect here. The story is basic but fairly strong for a comedy - much of it could conceivably be transposed to a non comedic film, though the scene with the cross dressing killer in a nurse's uniform might have to go! The characterization and humour are obvious and you can usually see it coming in advance, though I found much of it quite funny nonetheless. A lot of that has to do with the leads and not any particular genius in the script; both Arnie and Belushi are coasting here but the two have a natural comedic tendency, particularly Arnie who requires only subtle variations to his usual shtick ("but I dohn't want too touch his ass!") to elicit a laugh or two. And seriously - Arnie as a Russian? Director Walter Hill's work is nothing to write home about except when it comes to the action sequences, which are frenetic and exciting, and there's also a fun chase scene towards the end featuring two buses.

'Red Heat' is by the numbers but leans slightly towards the above average end of the scale. It's fun, and probably the type of thing you'd end up watching on TV when there's nothing else demanding your attention. And one more plus in its favour is that it is R rated and doesn't skimp on the nudity and violence, unlike so many of today's kiddie friendly films (though sadly a lot of the nudity tends to be Arnie's well molded physique).