I FINALLY TOOK THE RIDE ON MAD MAX FURY ROAD... AND IT WAS AWESOME!

In a summer crammed full of prequels, sequels and revisits, Mad Max was possibly one of the oldest revists on the books. To balance this age factor (and thus to be able to successfully compete with the raging war of the blockbusters that is the summer cinema scene at the moment) Mad Max cranked up the visuals. I am not a person who sets great store by what a film looks like. I mean, it is important – cinema being a visual medium and all – but it is definitely not the end all and be all for me. And yet, from the moment I saw the trailer I was hooked. The story was great, what it does for feminist cinema is nothing short of amazing (we will get to that in a second) but I just want to open this review with my initial reaction – So shiny! So chrome! – to quote the film. The expectation factor will have helped no doubt but the film pretty much works on your adrenal glands from the get go, catapulting you into a glorious, meticulously constructed universe that has you gripping the armrests from the get go and does not let you go until the bitter end 2 hours later.

Now the interesting – and difficult – thing about Mad Max is that yes, it basically is a 2 hour long car chase. In a universe where all natural resources are depleted and the water wars have all but annihilated humanity, those control the resources left – water, gasoline, bullets – reign, and they reign supreme. It is a harsh world where dog eats dog  and civilisation as we know it is all but a distant fairy tale from the ancients. Max Rockatansky used to be a cop. He used to take pride in upholding the law, he is now reduced to riding through the wastelands that are now the world, battling his demons and trying to survive. On the road he comes across Imperator Furiosa the once right hand woman of Warlord Immortan Joe who has gone renegade and is trying to reach her childhood home. The trouble is, she has with her some “things” that Immortan Joe values, and he will stop at absolutely nothing to get them back. The chase is truly on – and Max is truly caught up in the middle of it all…

Ok so first and foremost the film looks glorious. It is a true blue visual extravaganza. Even for the most cynical among you (and that would be me) the films visuals alone more than justify seeing it on the biggest screen your budget will allow for.  The experience of being grabbed by the gut and being dragged willy nilly into this truly insane world is a must for any action lover. The only slight point I may make is that yes, it is slightly too long. Around the two hour mark I did begin to fidget and check my watch. This however, would have been balanced out by making the breaks in between the hardcore chase sequences a little longer. I have reasonable stamina in these matters but by the end of the second hour I was quite jittery from the sheer excess of action. But like I said, that is a side effect. Mad Max Fury Road is a visual spectacle well worth seeing.

Let us now put this fact to one side. It is, so to speak, a given circumstance. Let us move onto the other big discussion of the film – Charlize Theron and the feminism of Mad Max. Furiosa is not your average action hero. She is strong willed, bad-ass and willing to take on the world, but she is, you will have noticed, a she. Not only is she a woman – and truly realistic, fully formed female action heroes are rare enough in themselves – she is a disabled action hero. And both facts are completely incidental. In this world the fact that Furiosa is a woman or that she has lost one arm is neither here nor there. In fact this world is full of strong female characters who can easily hold their own against the men. There is, of course the matter of the wives – Furiosas cargo. Her main aim is to escape to her childhood home – the green place – and to take the five women Immortan Joe uses as breeders with her. When Max questions her about her motives, she replies – redemption. Well, one does not rise to the rank of Imperator without breaking a few eggs, so to speak. But this also constructs her as active, an author of her own destiny who makes her own decisions. And the wives, while typically beautiful and dressed, well, exactly as you would imagine they would be, they are not by any stretch of the imagination typical damsels in distress. They have their own distinct characters and storylines and they are as fully formed as secondary characters can be. They are beautiful women – and yet they are not defined solely by this fact. And all this in a hard hitting action film, where historically women are either chronically unable to cope with the action on various levels (they either need to be rescued or, like Clare in the latest box office wonder Jurassic World run around with perfect hair and high heels being very bad at trying to be active).If this is not a giant leap forward, I honestly don’t know what is.

And this is not the only deep part of the film. Yes, there is very little in the way of complex plotlines to get our teeth into but there is a lot of emotional material in there if you look. One theme that comes up repeatedly is disenchantment (spoilers upcoming, look away now if you are sensitive!). One of the most potent scenes is when Furiosa realises that the childhood home she had based her redemption and salvation on has been completely destroyed. The last dream she had, the last hope that nourished her has been destroyed completely. The same goes for Nux the warboy who goes through a slow awakening, realising that the legends of Valhalla spun by Immortan Joe are nothing more than lies meant to keep him and all around him in total submission.  In both cases, the characters reel from having their very sense of reality, truth and sense of the world destroyed. They need to reconstruct it from scratch and in both cases become more autonomous, more self-confident, better able to take their own destinies in their own hands.  It is, actually, one heck of a heavy wave as far as character development is concerned. And both Charlize Theron and Nicholas Hault who plays Nux the warboy portrays this spectacularly. Tom Hardy is a wonderful choice as the sullen Max. I have to agree with the common jokes on the matter pointing out that Hardy has hardly any lines – it is true, he barely speaks. And yet, Hardy manages to tell the story of his character without resorting to words and really does justice to the character we all know so well and love so much.

Mad Max Fury Road is, in short, a two hour long extravaganza that will blow your socks off on multiple levels. I am not a big fan of hype – well, who is – but I am glad this one lived up to the hype. It would have been a shame if a classic like Mad Max fell short of its fans dreams… 

WHERE HEARTS AND MINDS COLLIDE IN A WOMRHOLE... "INTERSTELLAR"

Well this was a big one – in so many senses of the word! Not least because it was yours truely’s first ever IMAX experience! I did smirk slightly when the usher warned the audience to look away if they felt disoriented or sick – but I did actually feel quite sick during one portion of the film (although, ironically, telling you which bit would constitute a spoiler) and I felt as if my head was full of cotton wool for quite a while after the film… I still loved IMAX though… Especially with a highly visual film like Interstellar, it’s almost obligatory to have it either in 3D or in IMAX… I mean, there are some films (*cough* Gravity *cough*) whose entire USP is based on its visuals and being viewed with “advanced” technology. Interstellar’s aim is to be a bit more than a pretty face though. And Christopher Nolan being Christopher Nolan – the film has plenty to say for itself. Is it all coherent – I hear you ask – or does the film actually deserve the hashtag Interstellarplotholes Well…

In a dystopian world where “the system” has been destroyed and everyone have become farmers in a desperate attempt to  keep the world (and by that I mean the entire planet) from starving to death, Cooper, once an astronaut, is restless… His children have known nothing different but he remembers a world where mankind was adventurous and exploration of the final frontier was still on the cards… That is why he is delighted to happen upon a top secret space mission run by what remains of NASA and headed by Dr Brand Sr (Michael Caine) and his daughter (Ann Hathaway) Cooper gets the chance to return to his vocation, and possibly save the world while he is at it… However this is a mission like no other, Cooper is headed for truly uncharted waters and picking the new planet humanity is going to live on is a tricky business at best…

Now, this film has, you may have noticed, a huge number of fans. This is because the film is ambitious, incredibly ambitious, on so many fronts… First of all, visually… Well what can I tell you the film is a stunner… There are so many so called set pieces of space, the planets and (mild spoiler alert) the wonderful visuals of the galaxy beyond the wormhole and (major spoiler alert for like one sentence) the universe actually inside the worm hole (this is the point at which I started feeling nauseated by the way) are wonderful feats of technology and imagination. Best viewed with some form of HD, you will definitely be visually satisfied by Interstellar…

You will also be emotionally satisfied by it. Nolan produces quite a few very successful full-blown tugs at your heart strings. Even the toughest in my group welled up a couple of times during this one. I cannot state examples without giving spoilers as a lot of the most emotional moments come at crucial parts of the story – sort of jump cries as opposed to jump scares if you will…

But on the third hand (I appear to be an octopus for the purpose of this review) the film is also very, very cerebral. Nolan puts in a lot of science and a traditionally complicated storyline, successfully blending quantum physics, theory in a dystopian space context… Or I mean, does he really? This is where the hashtag Interstellarplotholes comes into play… Because Interstellar is a thing to be felt and enjoyed, sure… But if you start actually thinking about it seriously, holes begin to appear… I mean it starts from the smallest things – how, for example, in a world where purportedly nothing grows except corn, does mankind still have beer? How come Cooper never loses his tan for the duration of his “decades” in space? And – this is a big spoiler so look away now if you’re sensitive but I need to get this off my chest it’s a big pet peeve of mine  - why oh why oh why does this wormhole somehow magically end up behind a bookshelf? I mean I get the whole circular storyline thing, much like the Alchemist of Paulo Coelho we find the answer to the mystery we were searching for back where we began as it were but… I mean why of all things behind a book case?? I mean I get the importance of circularity. I really do. It’s the whole Humanist mindset of human beings “not needing any mysterious beings to take care of them”, that we and all the resources within ourselves are the only guides we’ll ever need if only we realize our own full potential. And I have to say, this is one of the more beautiful and intelligent ways I have seen of putting this message across. But I do wish Nolan had paid a bit more attention to the science as he went along. I mean I’m not even getting started on the fact that the only explanation we have of a wormhole is the same old folding a piece of paper thing every other sci-fi movie seems to do. Nolan either wants to mystify the viewer or, and I feel this may be the actual answer, this is not necessarily about “accurate science”. It’s a parable of love, humanity and life in a science fiction context and we should follow what our heart is picking up and not get “entangled” in the whole scientific context making sense to the “t”. Then again, it is the 21^st century and there are people out there who have made a bona fide hobby out of hunting for plot holes so I’m not entirely convinced this was the best way forward for this film if this was indeed what Nolan was after…

Whatever it was, true to form, we will very obviously be chatting about Interstellar for a good while yet… 

A WHOLE LOTTA WOMAN AND A WHOLE LOTTA FILM HISTORY - "FOXY BROWN"

Aaah the ‘70s… A wonderful, intriguing era. If you’re one of those people who reckon they were born too late, chances are you wanted to be a teen in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s. I know I’d like to give it a try. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I will always be an ‘80s child. But I have a soft spot for the ‘70s, kind of like a cool older sibling or something. It wasn’t the luckiest of eras as far as special effects went. I defy you not to giggle at the opening sequence of Foxy Brown, it’s almost a video clip but with ‘70s special effects…  But that aside the decade through up some iconic films, characters, actors and actresses that continue to set the standard for the rest of us today. This is how we get to Pam Grier who starred as one of the first female action stars of cinema, the legendary Miss Foxy Brown… And you better not be just pooh-poohing this one off as just another old blacksploitation movie… Because this one is a whole lotta film!

Foxy Brown is excited. She is about to embark on a wonderful new life with the man she loves. Michael used to be a government agent – but all that was in the past. He has got a new identity and even a new face; they are both ready to ride off into the sunset together. However, you do not double cross the mob and then just waltz away from everything “scot-free”. The mob gets to Michael and kills him before he and Foxy can so much as enjoy one day of happiness together. Now Foxy is heartbroken but she sure isn’t a damsel in distress. And if she knows anything about anything, the mobsters who killed Michael are getting their come-uppance…

Now a cursory glance at this film might make you want to put it down and walk away. It is not high art, this much anyone can vouch for. But the fact that it has labels like “Blaxploitation” and “B movie” attached to it does NOT mean this film is not both an important part of cinematic history and when all is said and done, really, really good fun.

First of all, let’s talk about Foxy herself for a second. Pam Grier is, without any shadow of a doubt, one of the most important and impressive leading ladies of all times. And Foxy Brown is one of the screen’s first female action heroines. I mean I grant you, the genre of the film means that Foxy is highly sexualised – there is nakedness galore and sex is in almost every frame of the film. We would tut at a lot of that today and it does have something to do with the film’s genre but we must not forget that films today highly sexualise all the characters, especially the women, so the issue is more that of explicit content than anything else. Plus, even if she is highly sexualised one thing Foxy most definitely is not is a trophy. She takes an active part in shaping her own destiny; she is assertive and aggressive – traditionally “male” cinematic qualities – without letting anything go as far as femininity goes.

What I like the most about the film itself though, is the fact that the film tries to make itself as realistic as it possibly can. For example take the villains Steve Ellias and Katheryn Wall. They are two of the most horrible villains you can find. Steve has the looks of a typical psychopath of the era mixed with an actual psychopath. His partner in love and crime Katheryn is a cold hearted “madam” selling poor young women into prostitution. She is such a horrible character that the final “I want you to suffer” from Foxy hits right home. And yet they are clearly and truly in love. It’s rather sweet in a bizarre kind of way. “True love strikes in all kinds of places it seems” says Foxy at some point, referring to the two villains, and she couldn’t be more right. The other good “realistic” touch about the film is that Foxy actually gets hurt and harmed. Now, let it not be said that I am rooting for our heroine being harmed. But come on, in real life, if you  are harmed by the mafia and decide to take it on, chances are, even if you do win, that you will acquire a couple of substantial scars on the way.  Of course this is a film so ultimately Foxy defeats the mafia but hey… At least she does not just spectacularly destroy them “Punisher” style. There is some actual conflict in the film with actual danger to the characters success but also her life. I reckon that’s one of the things I dislike the most about action films. The way the hero seems to end up “destroying” the enemy and just winning so easily. No matter how many “acrobatics” you insert, it just doesn’t give me something to get my teeth sunk into. Foxy, on the other hand, gives you a lot to chew on.

And lastly, of course, it’s not just a female action hero we have here; we have a realistic female villain too. Katheryn Wall is both odious and a complete character in her own right… I mean you can argue how realistic it is to have a woman “running” the mafia like that but hey… I refer you to the websites online deconstructing the physical possibilities of the much admired “acrobatics” on some of the high market films. For all it’s “B” quality, Foxy Brown is an entertaining, exciting film with the rare added bonus of very realistic female characters that would stand up to the Bechdel test any day of the week… And given the rarity of the last type of film these days, if that alone does not make it worth watching, I don’t know what does. 

ABOUT FINDING YOURSELF IN A DARK PLACE... "DRIVE"

I fully intend to get more “up to date” on my reviews by the way. Just putting it out there. I was chatting to a colleague at work the other day and I was glad to hear that I am in fact not the only person who makes about ten New Year’s resolutions. I mean, you know, it’s good to have spares. I have like 5 or 6 this year. Tidying up the blog is one of them. Making my reviews more up to date comes under that heading. I mean, I will keep these randoms. Because this blog has always been about me going “Oh my God you guys, you’ll never guess what I discovered!” But yeah. Let’s  not lag too far behind either. I know this isn’t the clearest possible description of what changes I have in mind for the blog but don’t worry, it will become clearer. In the meanwhile let us concentrate on a more important question. How the heck did I take nigh on 3 years to watch Drive? It’s only, oh I don’t know, one of my top 5 favourite movies.

The driver (Ryan Gosling) is a man of few words. When you talk to him, you get the feeling life has made him this way. And to be absolutely frank, the life he leads doesn’t leave him much time to be touchy – feely. By day, he is a stunt driver on Hollywood movies. By night, he is one of the best get-away drivers that can be had for the right amount of cash. Meet his terms and he is yours, no matter what. And more often than not, he will get you out of no matter what. In short, as far as driving is concerned, he has a God given talent and he is using it every single way he knows how. And he has a rather solitary if fast-paced existence until his next-door neighbour Irene (Carey Mulligan) and her little son come into his life. This in itself is not a bad thing; it’s not a bad thing at all. It’s when his relationship with his neighbours enters a head-on collision course with his dark night-time dealings that the driver reaches a very dangerous point. He will need all his courage and talent to salvage even some of the things he loves. If he makes it out alive that is.

Ok, several things. First of all, be warned this film is full of dark places. I mean, you know me. I’m all about dark places and ultra-realism and all those things that make a film… Well not a fluffy romantic comedy. You know what I mean. No. The world of the driver is hard and dark. You may, at the beginning, be tempted to judge our hero as “bad” but it soon becomes very obvious that he is just keeping his feelings under lock and key. Why? We can only imagine. Because even in the credits Ryan Gosling is listed as “Driver” –we never even learn the hero’s name. And then, a ray of sunlight enters his world. A true, bright, warm ray of sunlight he cannot help but turn to. Unfortunately though, as is often the case with these things, clouds quickly scurry on to cover the sun and the driver is left bewildered and more vulnerable than before. Because those feelings he had under lock and key were there for a reason and now innocent lives are at stake.

Ryan Gosling is absolutely marvellous as the driver. One thing I loved about the whole film is that he is completely silent for a very large part of it. It is almost the character’s trademark. This, among other things, makes it very easy for us to project ourselves onto him. Well think about it; since you’ll be using your own experiences and imagination to figure out what’s going through his head, you will create a character sympathetic to yourself. Thus, anyone who has anything marginally similar to the Driver is going to end up adoring him. You might have been down on your luck relationship-wise and feeling lonely. You might be in a job you’re not particularly happy in and desperately want to get out. You might have been unlucky enough to have been backstabbed or may, for whatever reason, feel you need to keep your emotions hidden. You will like this guy. You will find something of yourself in him. The genius of the film is the fact that it makes it so easy for you to put it there J . Oh don’t get me wrong. I love the driver too. I’m just pointing out to you I reckon this comes about.

And then of course there is the supreme contrast of this state with his changed state when Irene enters his life. Pay attention and you will see all the little details like the changes in the lighting, the softer colours… But more importantly, the Driver speaks. He smiles. And the couple work so well together, the acting is just so brilliant your heart swells. I mean, at this point a word or two needs to be said about Carey Mulligan. She is one of the brightest stars of our time and yet I love the fact that she pulls of being completely, believably normal.  Yes, even an old cynic like me was rooting for a happy ending on this one. Did I get what I wanted? Well… Like a lot of things in life – and in this film – nothing is black or white. You will have to watch the film and figure the answer out for yourselves.

What I love about this film is that it is so close to real life and I saw – as I am confident a lot of you will – so many emotions I have felt and psychological places I have found myself in. I know that some people advocate a completely different you know, restful world where all the problems are nicely tidied up and any rough edges on characters are nicely filed down by the end. Thing is, that doesn’t tap into my real emotions. Life simply does not work out like that. I find it is rare that a film grips me at the heart strings like this and has me pausing the film now and again, simply because I just feel so tense I just can’t take any more adrenaline. It will not come on you all at once, oh but it definitely will grow on you… Now go watch the darn thing…

IN WHICH OTHER WORLDS ESCAPE TO US... "THOR"

I know, I know, this is mainly one for the fans. A film I mean. Not  blog post. I may have mentioned that on a normal day to day basis, Hollywood action – adventure films do not feature high on my “to watch” list. But there comes a time when even my interest is piqued. I’m guessing if you’re a fan of Marvel comics and all that that franchise entails, you have already seen this one. If, like me, you’re not THAT into comic books and the like, you may or may not be  contemplating watching it for a bit of a change one evening when you want to watch something fun but not out too much effort into philosophical analysis or complicated story lines. This is the first film of the series, the special effects are spectacular, the actors and actresses beautiful, it is everything modern Hollywood is today. What did I think of it? Well, I’m seriously considering watching The Avengers            later on this week so yeah; this should probably give you a clue…

In this first “episode” of the series, we are introduced to Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Loki, Norse “gods” who live in the peaceful kingdom of Aasgard ruled by their wise and benevolent father Odin (Anthony Hopkins). Thor is the elder and natural successor to the throne – and frankly he can’t wait. He’s an outstanding warrior, handsome, popular and a born leader. He is, on the other hand reckless, hot-headed and has a dangerous tendency to rush into situations without considering the consequences.  And when he opens his whole world up to the possibility of war with their eternal enemies the ice giants, Odin can find no further alternative but to banish Thor to Earth, minus his powers, to teach him a lesson in humility if nothing else. But if this is not painful enough, with Thor gone, forces within the palace that are not as friendly as they claim to be set to work… The danger of war is merely the tip of the iceberg as far these forces go. Thor may be adapting well to his new world and even making friends, especially in the person of the beautiful scientist Jane Foster (Nathalie Portman) but will he find what it takes within his soul to help him return to his duties back home and save his world?

I will not bang on and on about the entertainment value of this one. Like a lot of Marvel films, we are transported to a world of super-heroes and beautiful maidens and it is perfect, seamless, unadulterated escape from your daily woes for all of two hours. We know what we are getting and we get a good quality load. Romantic comedy, action, drama and a very well choreographed “alien getting used to our world” type comedy all rolled into one, and finished off with all the high sentiment and pumping adrenaline of classical storytelling and fairy tales. Now now, don’t get upset I called it a fairy tale. That is what it is, after all…

But there was one point I found particularly fascinating about this particular film. I loved the fact that Jane Foster is a scientist ( I do realise this is probably less to do with the film and more to do with the original storyline). But more importantly I love the fact that we are not told to just suspend disbelief and go “oh so Thor and the Norse gods are real after all – now, moving swiftly on”. The character of Jane Foster means that there is a voice constantly questioning the veracity of what is going on on screen and asking the question “well how can this be?” And sure enough, the film (or, like I said, the story itself. I haven’t read the comics so I’m not entirely sure which) provides an explanation based on physics. Now I know less about wormholes and the theory of parallel universes than I do about Marvel comics. Thus I have no idea how much the physics “stands up”. But I think it is a fascinating point that in the 20^th Century science has become so pervasive in every day life that even what would once be classed as “fairy stories”, now feel the need to provide at least a semblance of a scientific explanation for fear of alienating the audience. The mystification of the world is truly dead people, there is no mystery and no wonder… Or I mean, there is, but we are not very tolerant to it anymore. We MUST know the REASON. For some reason we simply can’t just kick back and enjoy the story…

And I mean, don’t get me wrong, perversely, I LOVED the fact that there is a scientific, “real life” explanation for it all in the film. But I just can’t shake this nagging feeling that this has become more of a “necessity” than anything else. And that we may have irretrievably lost an important part of our collective imagination… Then again, maybe the answer is to kick back and enjoy the ride. Because, if nothing else, Thor does provide a most entertaining ride. Highly recommended. 

IN WHICH WE SEE ANGER MANAGEMENT ISSUES CAN BECOME CONSTRUCTIVE : "THE AVENGERS"

The whole thing really began with my being pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed Thor (2011). Having the second film close to hand, it seemed really silly not to just go ahead and watch it. I have been taking a few days off recently. A weekend away with my friends, a few “mental health” days here and there…  It’s tough work working in events in the Christmas season. Sleep is not as much a part of my schedule as I would like, nor is “down time”. In situations like these, as the film so eloquently puts it “people need a bit of old fashioned”. Oh and well… Christmas is coming. It’s the season for a little old fashioned. I mean, ok, I do realise that The Avengers is not necessarily the first thing that occurs to one when you say “Christmas Movie” but I think there’s an argument to be made there. The film is, after all, all about everyone coming together for a common good, putting differences aside, learning from each other and concentrating on doing good in the world. Not sure you know what I mean? You may have a point, I am getting ahead of myself slightly. Let’s take this step by step…

At the end of Thor, we see Loki cast into an abyss, vanquished… This, it seems, was merely a hiccup in Loki’s attempts to climb to the top. Not only has he been rescued, he has been given an army. The destination? Earth. Loki is determined to conquer the planet and claim it as his own – he will have the kingdom Asgard denied him. And the attack is so ferocious and the power he has gathered so great that it will take every single super hero the Earth can muster, ranging from the incredible Hulk to Captain America to conquer him… But even with Thor, Loki’s own brother, joining the fight, what are the odds of a handful of heroes against an entire army that is truly “out of this world”?

The answer to that question lies, of course, in the word “heroes”. The Avengers is everything a superhero movie should be – and then some. The only thing that was missing from the conventional mix was a “love interest” story which I found rather refreshing to be honest. Forcibly inserting a rather “out of the blue” love affair usually seems a little unnecessary to me.  I mean ok, there is the “attraction” between Natasha Romanoff and Hawkeye but there is a lot of military style “loyalty” mixed into that. I mean, yes, there is the hint that there may be something more to their relationship, but her will to save him is based largely on her wish to redeem her past sins. Oh and there is of course Pepper Potts and Iron Man (I think he is my favourite Avenger by the way. I find him the most “human” of the lot. I know they all have their token faults but Iron Man has actually personality issues and borders on the dysfunctional. Plus Robert Downey Jr.’s rendition of him is HILARIOUS.  ). One might argue that all of this makes to film rely a little too much on explosions, special effects and “boys toys” as it were. But honestly… Who watches The Avengers for the philosophical messages and character development?   

Another thing I noticed is that the place of humour in the movie has been notched up quite a bit. It is mainly Loki’s domain – but this is of course Character creation 101: a believable villain has to have at least one quality that we deem positive. Between him and Iron Man, the film provides quite a few genuine giggles  - always a plus in my book.

One last thing I noticed in the film is the several references to God and religion. One is when Captain America says in reference to Thor and Loki “There is only one God and I am sure he doesn’t dress like that”. The second more open reference comes towards the end when we see the clips of the aftermath of the war when a man says “it feels nice to have someone watching over us”.  The Avengers are clearly not a Parthenon of gods, but guardian angels? Possibly… It all links in to the “bit of old fashioned” the film points out we all need some times. I don’t necessarily mean the film is promoting religion in any way shape or form. I think the message is that of return to what we perceive as “old fashioned values” in the face of chaos and negativity. Things represented largely in the film by Captain America : loyalty, obedience in a soldier, self-sacrifice… He is, in fact, a stark contrast to Iron Man who is the flippant and egocentric millionaire at the beginning of the film. At the end he has learnt the value of teamwork and is even prepared to take quite a significant “one for the tem”… Heck, even the Hulk learns to use his.. “considerable anger management issues” to the greater good.

It is interesting that this model of film was so popular in the time of the Second World war – Captain America’s epoc : A disparate, unlikely crew rub each other the wrong way at first, but learn to pull together to fight a common evil… I am not really surprised that the theme has re-emerged in these days of economic uncertainty…

Of course I may be overthinking the whole thing – and I do strongly encourage you to not think about it too much and get stuck in the movie and have a good time… But I guess I’m saying there is interesting stuff to think about in there if you are inclined to a bit of post-watching analysis… 

THE LATEST TAKE ON A CLASSIC: "STAR TREK – INTO DARKNESS"

I’m a bit old fashioned when it comes to Star Treck. It has to be the original or none at all. By that I mean, you know, the classics. Shatner. Nemoy. Takei. I have all due respect for The Next Generation and Patrick Stewart. But anything after that I tend to kind of shudder at and turn away. I dunno. It’s a personal thing. So when this film came out I sort of shuddered at it as well. But being a massive fan of Benedict Cumberbach, I had to see it as well. Well that and the fact that I’m a massive Star Trek fan. I was %100 sure I wouldn’t like it as much as the series, but then again, I had to see what exactly they had done to it. Well, I wasn’t surprised. I didn’t run from the room screaming, but it isn’t the original. Just saying…

So, we are “at the very beginning” as it were. A young Kirk ( Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Bones (Karl Urban) along with all the other familiar characters for the Enterprise are at the beginnings of their careers.  Kirk is recognised for his talent but seen as too young and impulsive. But his commended planning and bravery come directly into play when an almost unstoppable danger emerges from the heart of their very own organisation. The danger is great, the manhunt will lead the Enterprise into hostile territory and the stakes are very, very high but Kirk is completely determined he will be the one to bring the criminal into justice. Because this time… This time it’s personal.

Now, it’s tough writing this review in a way. I mean ok. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of Star Trek is going to take one look at the cast list and go “Oh Benedict Cumberbach is Khan… So why all the mystery??” I mean yes, we (we being Trekkies) know exactly who Khan is. This film is, essentially “how they met”. And a fine job of it J. J. Abrams does too. I think the film is better understood if it is taken as an effort to introduce a new generation to the Star Trek franchise. Put a couple of handsome faces in it, some modern special effects, you know, shake it up a bit. That’s why I’m kinda leaving these people to discover who Khan is themselves. People who know, don’t need much in the way of explaining – right guys?

Thing is, in a sense this is a successful effort. I had quite a few people who knew virtually nothing about the series who went “oh I should look into that” (queue yours truly holding forth for about 20 minutes on how they should really, really, start with the originals, no matter how old they are. I’m not sure if I actually convinced them or physically scared them to be honest… ). Now, I’m not sure if this is me being an old fogy or not, however, I really, really tried to see something “special” connected to this film. I failed. I’m not saying it’s a bad film, not at all. But see, I think I’ve sort of grown out of action – adventure films, unless they have something really, really going for them. This film is typical Hollywood fare. Handsome young men, big explosions, a relationship (were Uhura and Spock actually ever a bona fide couple? I mean yes there was electricity, yes I totally get that people want a “love interest” storyline in there especially since the Spock – Kirk “bromance” may well confuse younger viewers but still… I mean I don’t know. Do we really need a love triangle / interest every single time? Even when it was managing perfectly well without one? The jury’s out).

I mean, ok. I am aware of the fact that this is probably me being an old fogy. I’m probably just comparing it to the series in my head and “finding it lacking”. But if you do enjoy this sort of thing, please watch it. If you’re a trekkie, try and look at it as more of a standalone film loosely based on the characters of  Star Trek. I found that helped me quite a bit… 

THE LEGEND IS BACK - FROM THE DEAD - "SKYFALL"

I know, this was FAR too long in the arriving J  I mean the review, not the film – although fans may argue that the film was a little too long in arriving too, I honestly don’t know. It’s funny about Bond films. Over the years, it has turned into this timeless and omnipresent phenomenon. Normally this kind of thing would be criticised in a work of fiction. Let’s face it, most superheroes do die off at some point. Even Sherlock Holmes. To be fair though, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was of a different era. And felt that all good things should, ideally come to an end. But then of course there are things like comic-strip heroes being killed off, the fans revolting, and the hero being brought back from the dead…  I don’t know what to make of that, honestly. Skyfall does two things in this “instalment” of Bond. It delves into Bond’s past and gives us an all be it small sneak peek into his childhood. And briefly deals with the concept of resurrection.

In fact, the past and various resurrections are the main theme of the newest Bond. First, Bond himself (currently Daniel Craig) who is assumed dead after a rather unfortunate operation in Turkey (plug: my home country. And the operation takes place in Istanbul, my home town. So there.) Of course, this is Bond we’re talking about so he survives. And he is very tempted to go into hiding and end his days in a small Turkish village by the sea (shameless plug number 2). However… Duty calls him back. Back to MI6 and back to life, the MI6 and more specifically M (currently Judy Dench) is in trouble. The threat comes from deep in M’s own past,  a foe she had assumed long dead and gone (Javier Bardem) is back to haunt her. And as long as he is haunting her, actually killing her and destroying the MI6 are all very real options. Only Bond can save the day… But can he? Bond is human like any other agent (ehm) and both his age and the near death experience he had have severely shaken (not stirred) him. Can he muster enough of his former glory to protect the agency and the country he loves?

I have several gripes with Bond films. The “immortality” of Bond is the main one. I mean, at least in Doctor Who they have worked out an EXPLANATION for his face changing and him never dying. Ok, it’s a completely unrealistic sci-fi setting, but honestly. It’s better than Bond receiving a hail of bullets, not even getting a scratch, turning, firing one bullet and hitting the bad guy square between the eyes. I mean come on. These are men who have dedicated their lives (more or less) to organised crime. You would assume they could at least shoot properly. This film alters this situation somewhat. I mean, naturally, Bond wins the day, defeats baddies against impossible odds,  all that jazz (and you know what, this doesn’t even count as a spoiler!). But at least this time he has some realistic difficulties doing it. We actually explore the possibility of him getting physically and emotionally effected by what happens to him. His marksmanship begins to seriously suffer. He gets nervous. He isn’t as strong as he used to be. I seriously believe that these are all good things. Possibly not as human as I would like but steps in the right direction. And besides, I guess Bond’s “immortality” is part of his appeal for the die-hard fans. And I am not a die-hard fan, so who am I to say? The cast is brilliant (the only person I couldn’t work into the synopsis is Ralph Finess). The special effects are… Well, let us say they are more than worthy of Bond. One of my dearest friends (who is more of a Bond fan than I will ever be) reckons   that the film is definitely not destined to be a Bond classic but is still more than presentable. So there you are. I even have a “fan’s eye view” for you. Enjoy J

FROM GAME TO REALITY (SORT OF) : "PRINCE OF PERSIA – THE SANDS OF TIME"

Now, admittedly, this is going to mean a lot more to those of you who actually play video games. I have an announcement. I don’t play video games. No, not one bit. In short, I honestly have no idea how it compares to the game, what the overlaps are, etc. I should actually ask a friend who does this regularly. I may do that still. But actually, no. I mean, these films shouldn’t, from a business perspective, cater ONLY to gamers, right? I reckon not. So here’s a non-gamer’s perspective on this little number. And she happens to be smiling on the movie.

Destan (the rather yummy Jake Gylenhaal) is the adopted son of the King of Persia. He and his two brothers and their uncle, the brother of the king(Ben Kingsley) are out on a mission of conquest and they happen upon the holy city of Alamut. Recent intelligence from the spies says that this historically neutral city of great historical importance is actually supplying weapons to their enemies. The Persians invade the city. Destan is among the most successful warriors there. However, he very quickly finds out that the story about spy intelligence is all a decoy. There is a villain in their midst. And he is after a mythical magic dagger that would allow him to reverse time, putting himself in power. Destan, along with Tamina, the princess of Alamut and the keeper of the sacred dagger, must form an uneasy alliance to stop him. The fate of the entire world may well be at stake.

Ok so basically, you know what this is? It is a road movie, where too initially completely dissimilar protagonists learn to love each other, bond and fight for a common cause on the way. That coupled with the type of romantic comedy that is as old as Shakespeare (I’m thinking Taming of the Shrew). You know, sassy girl gets “tamed” into femininity by the wit and courage of a truly good man. Ladle on a good dollop of special effects (come on, it is based on a video game at the end of the day) and voila. Prince of Persia. Now, I know that thus far I have not  exactly waxed lyrical about the topic. This is precisely why I rarely review Hollywood films, unless they are massive “event” films that is, these days. I am slightly sick of the (in my view) regurgitated storylines. The independent works, the European cinema, the more experimental directors actually have the capacity to offer you something you cannot “foresee”.  Things that really catch you short and make you think. I mean, Aeon Flux, that I reviewed the other day, has elements of this. I did not mention it much in the review because if I did a massive spoiler and the end of the film would come crumbling down but it is there. This film does not have that though. Sorry.

Ok rant over. This being said, why on EARTH did I put it in the blog then? Well, because, credit where it’s due, it is good at what it does. It is an action film. It stars Jake Gylenhaal and has a massive amount of him doing fighting scenes (eye candy alert!). I pretty much like Ben Kingsley in every single thing he does. It is classic Hollywood amusement. Ideal to watch with your mates of an evening. I enjoyed it. It just virtually contributed nothing to my film culture thingy. Not every film needs to…  

LET THE BATTLE OF THE TITANS COMMENCE : "SHERLOCK HOLMES: A GAME OF SHADOWS"

I have been waiting for this film for SO long. I love the new take on Sherlock Holmes. To be absolutely honest, I believe I do prefer the Benedict Cumberbach version of him better though. You know, the series. Are they doing any more of those by the way? If yes, when? I definitely should check on that. But in the meanwhile, let us return to the film in hand. Now, before, Holmes was the epitome of the old-fashioned hero. Strong, manly, spoke little, went straight to the point when he did and was a complete gentleman in all other ways besides. This Holmes is a brilliant mind and a brilliant detective, however also childish, selfish and possible manic-depressive. I also love the new Watson, who has his own character and personality (albeit he finds it hard to assert them when Holmes is around – but this is understandable). Gone is the bumbling doctor, whose main duty in life was to ask dumb questions at the right time so the reader could grasp the intricacies of the plot. This Watson (especially since he happens to have the body of Jude Law), is a force to be reckoned with.

And Holmes simply cannot do without him.  Watson finds this out much to his distress after his wedding, because even on their honeymoon, Holmes cannot seem to leave them alone.  Not only does he burst in on them, oh no, he brings a foray of disaster and assassins with him. This, however, may be a slightly unfair on Holmes. Not least because he is not so much pestering Watson as saving his life and the life of his bride. The reason they have assassins after them however is because Holmes has finally met his match:  An arch-villain whose intellect and genius may well actually match up to that of Holmes, Professor James Moriarty. And Watson just happens to be Holmes’ Achilles heel.  Moriarty’s aim however, reaches far beyond messing with Holmes and Watson. He has his sights set on the control of all of Europe, possibly the entire world. And Holmes is the only person capable of figuring out that he is behind all these machinations, much less stop him…

I love this series. So much so that even though a purist would say that Holmes should die and stay dead after his fight with Moriarty (oh come on. You knew that. I cannot believe you haven’t actually read the books. Shame on you.  No, really.) Anyway, the point is, I don’t care. You may have figured out by now, I am a sucker for anyone and anything that makes me laugh. Robert Downey Jr. is hilarious. I’m talking belly laughs, clapping and stomping on the floor. His interaction with Watson is perfect (as I outlined a tad in the first paragraph). The action sequences and effects are both spectacular and exciting. And the storyline is both complex and imaginative, just as a Holmes – Moriarty story should be. Oh and if you think about it, you could argue it asks serious political questions about things going on behind the scenes in any given conflict. But it is so well done; you don’t necessarily need to think about it, if you see what I mean. It’s there if you want to. Very unobtrusive yet fully there. Yet, if you just want to watch a funny and brilliant movie and not “think” about anything in particular, well you can do that too. It all depends on what you want from your evening’s entertainment – and this baby pretty much has everything you could need… 

YOUR WEEKLY DOSE OF SUPERHERO : "IRON MAN 2"

This is typical me, it needs to be said. I literally jumped in and watched this anyway, because it was convenient more than anything else. I had no prior knowledge of the series; I hadn’t even watched the first film. It had Robert Downey Jr. in it. It was a superhero movie. Oooh it has been nominated for the special effects Oscar®. That was just about the sum-total of my knowledge of the film. What can I say; I’m not always the epitome of professional conduct when it comes to my film watching habits. In the end, I had to put it in the blog. And just hope that there were enough nutcases like me who just dive into the middle of a series with no rhyme or reason. Or, alternately, have watched the first film already and don’t really care that I haven’t.

Having invented the Iron Man suit, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has literally become the personification of peace on earth. “Peace is privatized” he announces proudly and the press lap it up. He already has riches, now he has worldwide fame and the kind of adulation only a super hero can have. He is, both seemingly and actually, an eccentric and slightly egocentric businessman that does whatever he damn well likes without regard to too much else, so all this suits him just fine. The long suffering Pepper Potts (Gwenyth Paltrow) does her best to keep him in line and to keep his company from going under completely. But under this perfect veneer there is trouble brewing. Both the government and Stark’s rivals will stop at nothing in their plotting to get their hands on the suit. Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a rather brilliant Russian physicist is not only out to get Stark but is possibly the only person with the brains and the technical capability to bring him down. Then there is the small matter of finding a replacement for the “core” that keeps Stark alive. As in, Stark has failed to find one. And he is desperately low on cartridges…

Now, this is the kind of Hollywood film I really do love. I mean yes, we know that Pepper Potts and Tony Stark will get together in the end. Yes, Tony Stark will defeat the bad guys. But Tony Stark is far from your average squeaky clean super hero. I love superheroes with attitude problems, especially if they are acted by actors as successful as Robert Downey Jr. In fact, after having seen his success in Sherlock Holmes in a very similar role, I am beginning to suspect that he is not so much acting but just being himself (a bit like a modern Clint Eastwood if you will). No matter though, he is just too funny. The comedy value alone would, in fact, make the film a joy to watch.

But then, there are the special effects. I honestly don’t know what I think of the whole school of thought whereby people go to films solely for the special effects. I am not one of these people. But every now and then, I enjoy a good show. And come on, even if you are all French New Wave, Godard and Truffaut when it comes to films, you have to admit that a good, old fashioned action flick is really, really fun. Especially if it makes you actually laugh outloud. And go “Ooooh!” at the special effects. I’d try to get this in blu-ray if poss. And I’d watch it with the sound blaring. And popcorn. If I had my way that is. Just saying. 

"THE TOURIST" THAT GOT A BIT LOST

Now I’m really confused about this one. My boyfriend has some part in this – I’m sorry baby but it has to be said. It was yet another of the more recent films I had been unable to keep in touch with you see. My boyfriend having enjoyed it a lot was telling me about it, all emotion and excitement and he ran all the way through. Right to the end. Including the plot twist. I didn’t see it coming, I don’t know why I didn’t stop him but it happened. We then watched the film anyway, which is fine but there was something missing... I mean, I’m honestly not sure whether it was the fact that I already knew the plot twist or that the film was lacking something. But the reviews I have of the film are mixed – very mixed. Hence my sneaking suspicion that the film is not entirely up to scratch. Mr Depp, you disappoint me.

The story is that of spies and deceit. Elise (Angelina Jolie) is wanted by the police. The thing is, her lover is wanted even more. The problem is, no one knows what he looks like because he has had extensive plastic surgery changing his face completely. One tends to do that when one is wanted by half a dozen international security agencies AND a dangerous mobster whose money one has stolen. Of course Elise is not about to give her lover up that easily so she hatches a plan. A decoy in the shape of the unsuspecting Frank (Johnny Depp), an American tourist that happened to be passing by is chosen and interacted with. This suits Elise because now everyone thinks Frank is her lover. Frank, however, is now one of the most wanted men in Venice.

Now. The so-called plot twist is so obvious, I don’t even feel the need to slip in a disclaimer. I’m not entirely sure why this is the case though. I did know the twist before I watched the film, this much is true. However, the thing is it seemed... A little too obvious.  Just a tad. And when you have that wrong you see, settings, acting, direction... It’s all very nice but that’s the thing with spoilers. They spoil things. And I think it is the fact that the film tries to conceal something so obvious that means that it has not been nearly as popular as one would have initially thought it would be. I mean, that is the point with stories. The anticipation. Without that, seriously, what do you have? So honestly, my boyfriend is not to blame. He may have had a bit of an effect on my experience but seriously. Hiding things in plain sight is a tricky business. And The Tourist gets it wrong. Oh it’s funny. It’s amusing to watch of an evening. Then again though, if you want a touch more from your cinema, you can give it a miss. Seriously.