Monsters vs. Aliens

Director: Conrad Vernon & Rob Letterman
Starring: Reese Witherspoon, Seth Rogan & Hugh Laurie (voices)

A highly entertaining animated adventure that takes a high concept and makes it equally appealing to children and to adults with excellent CG animation.

The very best family films are those that are able to appeal to not only children, but also to the adults that will accompany those children to watch the film. With Monsters vs. Aliens, Dreamworks has managed to make a film with a concept that appeals to children, to the child inside most adults whilst also offering enough humor that appeals directly to adults, or at least those with a history of enjoying films featuring Monsters and/or Aliens.

When a strange meteor hits Susan Murphy (Witherspoon) on her wedding day, she finds her life forever changed as properties within the meteor make her grow to 50ft tall. Having been captured and contained by the US Military, Susan finds herself in the company of other strange creatures including: Dr. Cockroach (Laurie), a mad scientist with the head of a cockroach; The Missing Link (Will Arnet), an amphibious-reptile man; Bob (Rogen), a living gelatinous blob and Insectasaurus, a gigantic insect. The chance for freedom for Susan and her companions comes when the Earth finds itself under attack by an alien robot sent to track down the energies of the meteorite that affected Susan therefore leading to high adventure and action where Susan learns of inner strengths she never knew she possessed.

Taking cue from children’s stories and films like Monsters Inc. the makers of Monsters vs. Aliens make sure that while their characters are recognizably monsters, they are nevertheless likeable monsters, helped by the addition of comedy actors to provide their voices and plenty of humor both verbal and visual. The makers of the film also ensure that there are plenty of in-jokes for fans of the B-Movie Monster and Alien films of the 1940s to the 1970s with its monster’s origins reflecting those of popular movies such as Attack of the 50ft Woman, The Fly, The Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Blob and Japanese Mothra films whilst also referencing popular Sci-Fi films like The Day the Earth Stood Still, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and even Dr. Strangelove. Whilst such references may be lost on young children, they help add an extra layer of fun for adult audiences.

Monsters vs. Aliens also features a strong voice cast featuring Reese Witherspoon as the lead character Susan who brings plenty of lovability and confidence to her character. Giving support is Hugh Laurie (TV’s Blackadder, Jeeves & Wooster and USA’s HOUSE M.D.) who relishes the chance to play Dr. Cockroach as a sound intellectual in one moment and maniacally laughing mad scientist in the next; Seth Rogen (Knocked Up, Pineapple Express) mines his laid back charm as the blissfully mindless blob Bob with Rogen’s own laugh being particularly suitable for his character’s childlike naivety; Will Arnet (TV’s Arrested Development) provides his character, The Missing Link, with the right amount of bravado but with sensitivity too whilst Rainn Wilson (USA’s The Office) is enjoyably obnoxious and superior as the Alien leader Gallaxhar. Rounding out the rest of the roles include Kiefer Sutherland (TV’s 24) who parodies his Jack Bauer persona as a gung-ho General and Stephen Colbert (of political satire show The Colbert Report) as The President of the United States.

Overall, whilst the plot itself is fairly simple and straightforward, Monsters vs. Aliens features enough humor, action, enjoyable characters and performances and impressive visual effects (be sure to see the film in 3D at cinemas if you are able) that Monsters vs. Aliens is very enjoyable and appealing to old and young audiences alike. Recommended.

Rating: 4/5

Duplicity

Director: Tony Gilroy
Starring: Clive Owen, Julia Roberts & Paul Giamatti

An often fun con artist caper that features some fun twists and interplay between its lead actors though is not always as light and fun as it tries to be.

Reuniting Clive Owen and Julia Roberts who last performed on screen together in Mike Nichols’ Closer, their on screen relationship this time is less bitter than that of their previous collaboration and is instead more quick witted, sharper and instead of using insults to create tension, insults are given to generate suspense and keep the audience as much on their toes over the motives the actors’ characters as the characters do to each other.

No stranger to espionage, writer/director Tony Gilroy, having already directed the excellent corporate/legal thriller Michael Clayton and having scripted the Bourne Identity film series returns to a similar arena for his latest film Duplicity. However, where Gilroy’s previous efforts were strictly serious in the drama/thriller arena, with Duplicity he mixes drama with a healthy dose of humor with as many twists and surprises coming from its character’s dialogue as from the events they are involved in. Ray Koval (Owen) is a former MI6 Intelligence Operative now working for the intelligence department of a major corporation looking for inside information on a rival company. Clare Stenwick (Roberts) is a former CIA Operative working within that rival company and feeding the inside information out to Koval’s employer. Through the reveals of a past history between Koval and Stenwick in a series of cleverly constructed flashbacks, using split screens to give the feeling of a jigsaw puzzle and the scenes contained within clues to the overall plot, we find that the pair is aiming to manipulate both corporations and possibly each other to make a profit for themselves.

The plot itself is actually a fairly traditional affair. Both characters being former spies knowing that their skills at manipulation ultimately means they can’t even trust each other but find themselves attracted to each other regardless is an entertaining twist on a relationship. As Koval states during one flashback, no one really trusts anyone though they’re honest enough to actually say it. So, with our lead characters possibly manipulating each other but also manipulating their employers who themselves employ people and technology to prevent anyone, especially their rivals, from gaining their secrets means that you are kept on your toes throughout most of the film. Sometimes it gets a little tiring as, even after some further twists in the films final scenes, you are still left waiting for there to be more when you want to relax. What helps make a lot of the espionage and double-crossing fun to watch though is the frequently witty dialogue which, while not as quick and fun as that of the Ocean’s Eleven films, is still enjoyable.

Performances in Duplicity are generally pretty good though sometimes unsatisfying. While Clive Owen and Julia Roberts make for enjoyable leads and perform well together, they don’t quite have the bounce, the energy of that some other actors may have given to those roles. Clive Owen in particular, whilst frequently enjoyable in his scenes without Roberts, is slightly less enjoyable in scenes with Roberts despite having better dialogue in those scenes and compares, less favorably, to similar scenes shared between George Clooney and Julia Roberts in Ocean’s Eleven. Also, the supporting cast of Duplicity features the excellent Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti as the rival business leaders whose competition allows for Koval and Stenwick to work their con. However, as good as Wilkinson and Giamatti usually are, and there are also good in Duplicity, they barely have any screen time in the film, especially Wilkinson, which is also disappointing.

Overall though, Duplicity is an enjoyable film. The performances, while not as excellent as they could be, are still enjoyable and the plot, while not offering anything too original, is executed well enough and features enough witty dialogue that Duplicity still manages to satisfy.

Rating: 3/5

Bronson

Director: Nicolas Winding Refn
Starring: Tom Hardy, Matt King & James Lance

An interesting approach to a biopic in this film about England’s “Most Violent Prisoner” results in an interesting film but one that is also only occasionally enjoyable.

Charles Bronson, born Michael Peterson, is a cult figure in British society. Seemingly driven to make a name for himself he has somewhat succeeded with his reputation for being “the most violent prisoner in Britain” having been arrested in 1974 for stealing £26.18 from a Post Office, Bronson has spent most of the 35 years since in prison (with just over 4 months on parole in total over the same period) and has spent all but 4 of those years confined to solitary for acts of violence against prisoners and guards, rioting and hostage taking. In addition to his reputation for violence, Charles Bronson has also becoming an award winning poet, artist and author. It is these latter aspects of his history that has influenced this film on his life the most.

Bronson tells the story of Charles Bronson as if portrayed through a theatrical performance performed by Bronson himself (here played by actor Tom Hardy). With frequent cuts to scenes of Bronson on stage telling his story to an unseen audience with jokes and putting on make up to play the roles of people he has encountered, this biopic takes an interesting approach to an otherwise formulaic genre. How much of what we see is based on actual truths and how much is false bravado on the behalf of Bronson? It is an enjoyable approach and one that allows Tom Hardy to portray Bronson as the larger than life character that he may believe himself to be and that some that know of him already believe. On occasion the performance feels OTT but then, admitting early on that he, Bronson not Hardy, can’t really act means that the moments of OTT acting actually serve the performance rather than detract from it. If there is one aspect of Bronson that is most memorable, rather than the inventive approach to the narrative, that aspect would actually be Tom Hardy in his approach to playing Charles Bronson. Bronson is a role unlike any Hardy has played before and is, no doubt, the most intense character he’s portrayed in his career so far. Putting on weight and building up muscle for the role, Hardy looks the part and Hardy is also careful to make the most of his physicality to aid in his portrayal.

However, despite a memorable performance from Hardy and the stage performance approach to the story and the portrayal of events, the story of Bronson himself, as seen in the film, frequently fails to generate much interest beyond a few scenes. Bronson’s earlier life, pre-imprisonment, is interesting as are the scenes dealing with Bronson’s later years as an artist, but in between the film frequently gets repetitive with too many scenes of Bronson getting in a fight and getting locked away again and again. When Bronson cuts away at one point to insert actual news footage from the riot and hostage taking at Broadmoor in 1983, it entertains and educates but also serves to remind us how less interesting some of the performed sequences from Bronson’s incarceration are in comparison. Also, while sometimes entertaining, the moments of OTT can also be quite intrusive leaving the film with pacing and a tone that is quite uneven especially when it becomes uncertain as to whether it is glorifying Bronson’s attitude to imprisonment or trying to portray the harsh gruesomeness of it.

Overall, while ambitious in its approach and featuring a very memorable turn from Tom Hardy, Bronson is still only an average story about one of Britain’s most notorious criminals. Bronson is definitely a curious film and one with cult appeal but its overall value lies in its lead actor’s performance and its narrative approach rather than in Bronson’s own story.

Rating: 3/5

Watchmen

Director: Zack Snyder
Starring: Patrick Wilson, Jackie Earl Haley & Malin Akerman

A very enjoyable and successful adaptation of the critically acclaimed comic book series that manages to remain largely faithful to the original material’s story and themes.

It would be an understatement to say that Zack Snyder had a huge task ahead of him with pressure to match in regards to him signing on to adapt Watchmen for the big screen. Watchmen is widely considered to be greatest comic book series ever told, receiving much critical acclaim, adoration from fans and also held responsible for ushering in a new era of mature superhero comics. On top of that and over 15 years of failed attempts to adapt the series for film featuring attempts by such directors as Terry Gilliam, Darren Aronofsky and Paul Greengrass, also following the massive critical and commercial success of The Dark Knight in 2008 and also being a story featuring characters that are largely unknown to audiences who’ve never a read a comic book before, it would seem almost impossible for Snyder to make a film that could do the material justice and achieve success. Luckily Snyder has in fact succeeded in making a very faithful, yet accessible, adaptation.

Watchmen deals with a lot of mature themes, posing the question of what would have actually happened to the world if superheroes had existed and how would they change world events and what does it mean to be a superhero anyway? In this world heroes worked for the government even intervening in Vietnam. After succeeding there and Nixon continuing as President beyond two terms and facing rioting and accusations of authoritarianism, superheroes were forced to retire or be arrested. Now, there is the threat of war against Russia’s arms build up, a response to America’s superman Dr. Manhattan, with nuclear war beckoning when a former hero is found murdered. Is someone out to kill heroes and, if so, why? Could it be to ensure no one interferes with the threat facing the world? We get to see what has become of the world’s former heroes in their retirement s the threat of war increases. Rorschach never retired, fighting alone and, under threat of arrest, has become increasingly violent and alienated; Dr. Manhattan, the only hero with actual powers making him almost God-like has grown emotionally distant as he loses his human perspective; Nite Owl is retired, missing the old days yet never admitting it, becoming out of shape; Ozymandias traded in on his fame as a hero and now runs a multi-billion dollar industry looking to help the world in other ways and Silk Spectre sticks by Dr. Manhattan despite his distance leaving their relationship loveless. As events conspire to harm or otherwise prevent each hero from being able to intervene in any upcoming conflict they face an unseen threat to themselves and to the world.

Staying largely faithful to the look and the pacing of Alan Moore’s original comic book, Snyder surprises at how faithful to the text he has been. Visually constructing many scenes to resemble the way they were depicted in the comics whilst also keeping the script and dialogue faithful to that of the comic it is hard to imagine any film succeeding as being as faithful to its source material as this adaptation within and 2 & ½ hour film. For fans of the original comics this film should be very satisfying. Whilst not everything makes it into the film, the amount that does is impressive whilst some of the extra touches that Snyder adds to the material are often entertaining. An opening credits sequence that portrays the history of the superheroes from their appearances in the 1930s until the present day (the 1980s) is one of the film’s most impressive sequences taking additional material from the comics that wasn’t portrayed in the stories themselves and working it into the film to give the characters and the world depicted in the film’s plot plenty of context and insight. Also, a change to the ending that removes an element that new audiences may have found silly, results in a replacement element that works just as well and maintains much of the themes and events of the comic book’s conclusion. However, not all new elements or changes work. Some of Snyder’s soundtrack choices fall flat including one moment during a love scene that provokes laughs and the enhancements to some of the story’s action sequences feel more suited to a film like The Matrix or Snyder’s previous film 300 than in Watchmen. Also, the absence of many of the man-on-the-street scenes which gave a sense of the fear and desperation the average person felt in the face of nuclear war is instead replaced with scenes in the Pentagon that are less effective in generating the sense of hopelessness the world faces. Fortunately, what Snyder does right, and does right often, more than compensates for his missteps.

On the acting front, Snyder has been smart in casting actors that are not big names allowing for more believable performances. Patrick Wilson gives Nite Owl just the right amount of reluctance and regret that a man retired, feeling guilty for retiring and also feeling apprehensive about his ability to regain his glory days. Jackie Earl Haley is very impressive as the violent loner Rorschach, delivering punishments to law breakers without remorse and delivering lines with the right amount of hatred despite wearing a mask for most of the film yet demonstrating heart-breaking emotion and humanity in the film’s final scenes. Haley’s performance is, perhaps, the film’s most memorable. Billy Crudup gives a deliberately emotionless performance as the God-like Dr. Manhattan, seeing the world from a detached point of view as if human existence is a science project just to be observed. While Crudup’s performance sometimes suffers from some poor CGI that, while effective when his character is viewed at a distance, looks stiff in many close ups but still Crudup gets the character’s tone right. Jeffrey Dean Morgan is impressive as the Comedian, the dead hero whose life is seen through flashback. His character is one that is truly unlikeable and Morgan catches the character’s sleazy, selfish and amoral nature very well whilst also being an imposing screen presence. Slightly weaker are Malin Akerman and Matthew Goode as Silk Spectre and Ozymandias, the first manages to be very likeable yet Akerman struggles to maintain a strong impression in scenes with Crudup whilst also sometimes being unconvincing as a fighter while Goode, who initially captures Ozymandias’ smugness and sense of self-righteousness in early scenes fails to be as impressive in the film’s later scenes, sometimes coming off too weak instead of being suitably imposing or convincing with his words or actions.

Overall though, Watchmen is a film that succeeds far more often than it fails. Despite a few average performances and a few story and stylistic changes falling flat, the film impresses with the rest of its performances, its faithfulness to the complex plot and to the depth of its themes so that the overall experience is a very positive one and one that will hopefully satisfy fans of the comic books, entertain new audiences and highlight a different type of superhero story. A very satisfying experience.

Rating: 4/5

Franklyn

Director: Gerald McMorrow
Starring: Ryan Phillippe, Eva Green & Sam Riley

An impressive debut from McMorrow that mixes present day London locales, a Gothic Fantasy world and interweaving plotlines to create a very enjoyable mystery with strong performances.

Franklyn is a jigsaw puzzle of a movie, and if you don’t like puzzles then perhaps Franklyn isn’t the film for you. But, if you like mysteries and stories that require your attention then Franklyn should entertain. Featuring several different characters and following several different plotlines, Franklyn is a film that begins to make more and more sense as it goes along and as each plot strand interweaves and comes closer to revealing the whole picture. First, in a city of gothic fantasy called Meanwhile City where religion drives all of society, we have John Preest, an assassin without religion who is preparing for a kill then, in present day London, we follow three other characters: Milo, recently jilted at the altar by his fiancé, now has glimpses of a girl he knew as a child who he’s trying to locate; Emily, an artist who films her own suicide attempts for an art project; and Peter, a father looking for his son who has gone missing from a military psychiatric facility. How these three, real world, characters and John Preest in Meanwhile City relate to each other is vague at first but as connections between them all begin to surface, the mystery becomes even deeper, more interesting and more rewarding.

Filmed on a low budget, Franklyn’s fantasy based sequences still look very impressive. Meanwhile City is a gothic city gone mad where the architecture resembles Cathedrals with spires and arches and statues towering over the streets and high into the sky. Its inhabitants and their society bear resemblance to our own but in a society where church and state is no longer separate and bureaucracy also reigns. Meanwhile City and its people resemble a world that feels somewhat like a mix of Terry Gilliam’s Brazil and Alex Proyas’ Dark City and its main character, the assassin John Preest, looks like a Halloween nightmare wearing a white mask that resembles a straight-jacket in its material but with hollow, black eyes. The real world scenes, initially, stand out as looking poorer in comparison to the fantasy based scenes but soon the differences in quality seem less obvious as the director, McMorrow, makes good use of the Cathedrals of Canterbury and the alleyways of London to highlight similarities between these locales and Meanwhile City.

In addition to an interesting plot, and impressive set design, Franklyn also benefits from a strong cast and impressive performances. Ryan Phillippe manages to be effectively intimidating as Preest, whether wearing a mask or not, and speaking with a low growl and with spite for the world he lives in and the people he encounters whilst also being able to convincingly demonstrate his character’s vulnerabilities in Franklyn’s later scenes. Eva Green continues to be very watchable as, despite her character feeling like a stereotype at times as the traumatized artist with a gothic appearance and outlook, Green still infuses her character with world weary cynicism and intelligence and Bernard Hill delivers a very sympathetic performance as the father looking for his lost son and whose mistakes in the past caused the problems that lead to his son being committed to an institution in the first place. Hill manages to give Peter a satisfying amount of guilt and compassion. Most impressive though is Sam Riley. As Milo, his character and his story seems, at first, to the least in common with any other part of Franklyn’s plot but Riley gives a very earnest and likeable performance and is perhaps the closest thing Franklyn has to a lead character. Like with his performance as Ian Curtis in Control, Riley continues to demonstrate here the qualities that make him a talent to watch for in the future.

Overall, while the backgrounds of some of the characters feel old, and some of the fantasy settings, despite looking great, feeling over-influenced by similar settings from other films, Franklyn is still a very enjoyable film. The performances of its cast add much more depth to their roles than their character’s backgrounds might have permitted them whilst the mixing of a fantasy setting with stories set in recognizable locations like Canterbury help make the use of Meanwhile City more interesting than if the film had solely taken place there. Add to that an intelligent storyline that, whilst testing the patience of some audiences, wraps up into and interesting and satisfying finale that allows for both logic and fantasy to explain. An enjoyable debut from Gerald McMorrow.

Rating: 4/5

Gran Torino

Director: Clint Eastwood
Starring: Clint Eastwood, Bee Vang & Ahney Her

Clint Eastwood delivers an enjoyably grumpy performance in his latest directorial effort which is an enjoyable drama featuring themes of atonement, violence in society and also an unlikely yet touching friendship.

Atonement has been a regular theme in the films of Clint Eastwood, living with things you’ve done, living with things you’re about to do. It was a major theme in Unforgiven, and was again in Eastwood’s more recent films like Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby and Flags of Our Fathers and atonement appears again as a major theme in Gran Torino. Walt Kowalski (Eastwood) is a man forever living with the burden of the actions he had committed fighting in the Korean War. More than fifty years later, he’s never allowed himself to be absolved of his sins and find peace despite marrying and having a family. Now, with his wife recently deceased and his children distant and more concerned with their careers than with family, Walt is left alone, and bitter, living in a neighborhood and a country that is very different from the one he fought for. As the local priest points out to Walt, in efforts to persuade Walt to give confession, Walt knows a lot more about death than he does about life

When a family of Hmong move in next door, Walt initially sees it as a further inconvenience to his life especially when, forced by a local gang, a boy from next door attempts to steal Walt’s car, an antique Gran Torino. When the gang return to threaten the boy, Thao (Bee Vang), for failing and Walt intervenes when the fight carries onto his property. When he finds himself being treated as hero afterwards by the Hmong community who feel he acted to save Thao, Walt is reluctantly forced to accept their gifts, at the further urgings of Thao’s sister Sue (Ahney Her) and to allow Thao to work off his dishonor for attempting to steal Walt’s car. Despite an initial dislike of the boy and his family and the trouble they have brought him, Walt soon sees potential in both Thao and Sue to go on to do good in their lives and that their attempts to good by Walt and in the community which makes them better people than Walt’s own family and also sees the threat the local gang represents to them being able to have a good life which, after a few incidents of violence against his neighbors, leads Walt to decide to solve the gang problem and perhaps absolve himself of his own past sins.

Clint Eastwood gives a highly enjoyable performance as Walt Kowalski. Always grimacing, talking with a growl and delivering threats and insults regularly towards his neighbors and others he encounters, Eastwood’s Walt could easily be a retired Harry Callahan from Dirty Harry or William Munny from Unforgiven in his temperament though, while the performance sometimes strays close to a caricature of Eastwood’s earlier roles, Eastwood knows when to show restraint and even vulnerability making Walt a truly enjoyable, if unlikeable, character. In addition to Eastwood, there are strong performances from Bee Vang as Thao, who carefully and impressively portrays Thao’s development from the reclusive character he begins the film as to the more confident man he is on his way to becoming by the end thanks to Walt’s influence. Ahney Her is good as Thao’s sister Sue, smart, confident and kind and the force that opens Walt up to accepting his neighbors and Thao and there is also good support from Christopher Carley as a young priest who is persistent in trying to get Walt to accept forgiveness for his past despite the tirade of insults Walt directs at him at every opportunity.

Eastwood sucks in the audience through the characters and the careful, touching relationship he builds between Walt and Thao and Sue and despite a build up to a confrontation between Walt and the local gang that seems predestined, the ending itself surprises you by being different than expected yet far more satisfying. Overall, while sometimes not subtle, and following a path that might seem predictable, Gran Torino succeeds in entertaining with strong performances and an interesting ending that subverts expectations with strong results.

Rating: 4/5

Push

Director: Paul McGuigan
Starring: Chris Evans, Dakota Fanning & Djimon Hounsou

An entertaining, low budget sci-fi/action film that mixes a comic book-style plot and characters to satisfying results.

Whilst on the surface, Push’s world of psychics and their powers, of a shadowy organization trying to turn them into weapons and the attempts to fight back of those they target could come across as yet another comic book adaptation. However, despite the characters’ powers being presented like super-powers and despite the film having a comic book adaptation in publication, Push is an original concept taking a superhero sensibility to an old sci-fi concept with lashings of intense, kinetic action for good measure.

In the world that Push inhabits, there are people living among us with psychic abilities. There are many kinds, amongst them include “Movers” who can move objects telekinetically, “Watchers” who see the future, “Pushers” who can alter memories or implant subconscious commands into people, “Bleeders” who emit high-pitched sonic screams and “Shifters” who are able to alter the shape and appearance of objects. With a shadowy organization called Division looking to use or experiment upon people with psychic abilities, those that possess them are faced with just a few choices: join them and either work with them or die, fight them or go into hiding. Nick (Evans), a “Mover”, is a man in hiding after witnessing his father being killed fighting Division when Nick was a child. Now living in Hong Kong, using his abilities to cheat at gambling, he is approached by a young girl Cassie (Fanning), a “Watcher” who claims to see a future where Division can be defeated and her own mother freed but requires Nick’s help and that of an escaped “Pusher” named Kira (Camilla Belle) who is the only psychic to survive a drug devised by Division to amplify psychic ability.

While Push follows a fairly straight-forward course of people on the run having to fight off Division agents pursuing them, led by a “Pusher” named Carver (Hounsou), and a psychic Hong Kong Triad group and then choosing to fight back, mixing in a macguffin, a briefcase containing Division’s drug, some colorful allies in Cliff Curtis’ “Shifter” and enemies in Xiao Lu Li’s Triad “Watcher” and a destiny to be fulfilled, it is helped by some good performances from its cast, some exciting and inventive action sequences that make the most of the film’s limited budget and a world that is well-developed in its 110minute running time.

Chris Evans manages the leading man role of Nick very well, delivering his lines with a mix or wry charm and weary cynicism, Dakota Fanning handles a lot of exposition explaining the plot and Push’s world very well whilst effectively portraying her character as one that is wiser than her years suggest due to the futures she has seen and the life she has led. Hounsou is convincingly intimidating as the ruthless Division operative hunting down his escapee test subject while the supporting cast is filled with satisfying, if sometimes brief, performances from Cliff Curtis, Ming Na and Nate Mooney. If there’s one role that is less convincing, it is that of Kira, performed by Camilla Belle whose role changes frequently with different twists and turns in the plot with Belle sometimes struggling to keep up or convince in portraying the effects upon her character.

While there is a lot of set up in Push for potential sequels to develop further, Push itself stands alone far more effectively and satisfyingly than some other recent attempts at starting a sci-fi franchise such as 2008’s Jumper or Babylon A.D. With some entertaining action sequences and performances and an interesting world and characters, Push has enough to recommend it that, despite a somewhat predictable plot, still places the film above average.

Rating: 3/5

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Director: Woody Allen
Starring: Javier Bardem, Scarlett Johansson & Rebecca Hall

Woody Allen’s best film in years which, while far from his most celebrated pictures, is still intelligent, funny and enjoyable.

After a few recent flops, Scoop and Cassandra’s Dream, Woody Allen’s latest effort relocates the action from the London locales of his last three films to sunny Barcelona. It is a wise move as the lush, warm location and culture enhances his latest looks into romance and relationships and is further bolstered by performances by local, Spanish talents Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz.

The Vicky and Cristina of the title refers too two tourists visiting Barcelona. Vicky (Rebecca Hall), is sensible, engaged to be married, knows what she wants and feels she’s found it while Cristina (Scarlett Johansson) is more impulsive, less certain of what she wants or who she wants. Whilst visiting Barcelona, the two are approached by a local artist, Juan Antonio (Bardem), attempting to seduce them. Cristina accepts, wishing to see the sights of Barcelona and Juan Antonio’s attempts to charm her, and Vicky is dragged along. What occurs is an unexpected romantic encounter that shakes Vicky’s certainty over what she wants from life and Cristina finding a life that might be what she was looking for all along which takes further interesting turns when Juan Antonio’s ex-girlfriend Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz) moves in with Cristina and Juan Antonio.

The story of Vicky Cristina Barcelona is an entertaining one. The characters are well written, the courses of their relationships and feelings taking unpredictable yet natural paths and takes advantage of the rich Catalan culture of the area. The film is also helped by several strong performances. Rebecca Hall, still a relative newcomer, gives an impressive performance as Vicky. Vicky’s progression from a woman confident in her identity and desires and cynical of more spontaneous, wistful lifestyles such as that of her friend Cristina to a woman shaken by a romantic encounter that makes her question her previous lifestyle choices, becoming very nervous and uncertain is portrayed very effectively by Hall. Vicky’s character arc, and Hall’s performance, is perhaps the most complex and interesting in the film. Javier Bardem is also impressive as Juan Antonio, an artist who embraces love, sees it as something to enjoy even if he feels it is more romantic if left unfulfilled. Bardem performs the role with warmth and charm and wins over audiences, despite his non-traditional approach to relationships, as he charms Vicky and Cristina. Another stand out performance is Penelope Cruz as Juan Antonio’s talented, yet unstable, ex-girlfriend and fellow artist Maria Elena. Full of energy, of love and of anger, Cruz commands attention in her every scene and her interactions with Bardem prove how perfect, yet also how wrong, their characters are for each other.

If there is a weakness in the performances of Vicky Cristina Barcelona, it lies with Scarlett Johansson. Vicky Cristina Barcelona is Johansson’s third film with Woody Allen however this is likely her most demanding role of the three. Whilst Johansson does perform quite well, capturing the indecisive, impulsive nature of her character, when sharing scenes with performers such as Bardem and Cruz, her performance feels somewhat flat in comparison and far less memorable than that of her co-stars, even in scenes with Hall, her performance and character comes over as less than the equal of Hall’s Vicky. Whilst the performance is occasionally distracting, it satisfies more often than not. More distracting and less satisfying is Woody Allen’s choice of narrator for the film. While the narration in Vicky Cristina Barcelona serves a purpose in allowing the story to skip past unnecessary scenes of exposition and getting to heart of the story, the choice of narrator (Christopher Evan Welch) results in a voice that feels intrusive to the tone of the film and too often sounds bland and clinical whereas another choice, perhaps even Woody Allen himself, would have been warmer and delivering moment of wit with more success.

Overall though, Vicky Cristina Barcelona is an enjoyable film. Smart and featuring a dry wit that Woody Allen’s fans will appreciate and featuring several strong performances. It has some flaws and is less satisfying as Allen’s earlier films, but there is still much to enjoy and recommend to audiences.

Rating: 4/5

Doubt

Director: John Patrick Shanley
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Meryl Streep & Amy Adams

A very strong drama that succeeds due to the impressive performances of its three lead actors and in its ability to do just what the title suggests and plant doubt, doubt over the accused’s innocence and doubt over the accuser’s righteousness.

Based on his own stage play, John Patrick Shanley brings his story of how doubt and scandal can affect the appearance and appropriateness of a priest’s relationship with a young boy. Deriving its drama and tension from real scandals with frequent instances of molestation between priests and young boys in the church, Doubt begs the question whether any relationship between priest and child can be trusted or should be trusted. When a new priest, Father Flynn (Hoffman) is witnessed grabbing a boy’s hand in a courtyard to the boy’s disapproval and then later witnessed taking a private meeting with another boy who later re-appears emotionally distraught, questions are raised as to whether Father Flynn is acting appropriately with these children or whether, in spite of his warm and friendly demeanor, he could be a predator. Having already decided what the truth is, despite no actual evidence, Sister Aloysius (Streep) takes it upon herself to challenge Flynn and the priesthood and force a confession and resignation from Father Flynn with Flynn protesting innocence throughout though holding back information of his own.

With a third character, the young and innocent Sister James (Adams), caught in the middle between Flynn and Aloysius, the audience, like Sister James, are the ones left with the questions over whether Flynn is innocent and being unfairly persecuted by Aloysius due to differences in their attitudes or whether Aloysius, in spite of her attitude and cruel manner, is right and Flynn is guilty. Doubt asks whether real evidence is needed if your feeling are certain, Doubt asks whether you choose to side with or against someone because you like or dislike them or whether it is based on looking at the evidence, Doubt asks whether you can be so certain on the truth if everyone is against you. Doubt asks a lot of difficult questions and, fortunately, leaves the audience to answer them and ponder upon them long after the film has ended. Could Flynn be innocent? And, if so, why is holding some information back that could exonerate himself? If he is guilty, why does it sometimes feel wrong to root for Aloysius when her conviction is based on little evidence while her methods to get a confession are so cruel and unlikable?

The performances in Doubt are also excellent and add to the overall effect of the story. Hoffman portrays Flynn as a very warm and friendly individual and depending on your perspective, could be interpreted as all the evidence you need to exonerate him or could also be seen as merely a guise to protect himself and his actions to others. Streep is even better as Aloysius whose cold cruelty, supported by her religious conviction that she is right makes her difficult to root for even if you suspect her to be right to pursue Father Flynn and Amy Adams as the innocent and kind Sister James who has doubts about both Flynn and Aloysius but is also swayed by their personality speaks out to the audience as many should share her uncertainty. Individually all three are strong but together, especially in scenes shared between Hoffman and Streep, the performances and scenes are electrifying and full of tension.

Overall, while the ending remains open and evidence planted to point in either direction, Doubt certainly impresses and leaves the audience to ponder important questions. Whether you are left uncertain over who was right or wrong or whether you come away convinced on what the truth is, Doubt leaves you to ask yourself why you feel the way you do about its characters and their actions. It leaves doubt.

Rating: 4/5

The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button

Director: David Fincher
Starring: Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett & Jason Fleming

While not David Fincher’s finest film, in spite of its Oscar nominations, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is still a very rewarding drama and featuring much of Fincher’s visual inventiveness.

It might seem, on the surface, that The Curious Case of Benjamin Button has much in common with other films that have been awarded critical accolades; Beginning with an aged Cate Blanchett on her deathbed while the story of her relationship with her one true love is told through flashback is a device that bears echoes of Titanic and that the film’s title character is a witness to events that effected America and the World through the use of special effects also recalls Forrest Gump; however, while such similarities are evident, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is much more than them and certainly more satisfying than either. That the main hook of the story, a man born old yet grows physically younger as he ages, is not exploited as a gimmick but used to make poignant statements on the nature of youth and old age as well the role they play within relationships makes the film more satisfying on an emotional level. There are definite similarities between the physical and emotional dependencies one has upon others when young and also when nearing the end of their life and the nature of Benjamin Button’s story highlights this well and also highlights how the appearance of age can effect how a person can interpret the nature of a relationship between two people.

The use of special effects to depict, near flawlessly, the appearance of extreme age upon Brad Pitt as Benjamin Button, works very well in the film. The young Benjamin, in the body of frail old man, is both clearly old but also still clearly Brad Pitt underneath the wrinkles and as the character gets older and his body younger, it becomes difficult to identify where the aid of CGI stops and the start of Brad Pitt in just make up begins. That the CGI and make up is so effective adds a significant amount of believability to Pitt’s performance as it does again in later scenes where his body regresses physically to that of a teen. However, the effectiveness of the CGI does raise questions as to how strong Pitt’s performance truly is. The character of Benjamin soon becomes a witness to the actions of other, more colorful, characters that he meets throughout his life as well as being witness to events in history during his lifetime such as WWII and the beginnings of America’s space flight programs. Playing witness so often leaves the character something of a blank canvas which shows through in Pitt’s performance. Pitt, while good, is satisfied with watching others, narrating the scenes, but demonstrating little emotional response on screen when responding to anything he does or sees.

Even though Brad Pitt does give a good performance as Benjamin Button, his role is more memorable due to the nature of the character and the visual trickery used to achieve it but it is the supporting roles in the film that are the most memorable. Cate Blanchett gives quite a strong performance as Daisy who cares for Benjamin but whose appearance becomes a barrier to them both in their relationship allowing them only a brief moment together where Daisy’s age and Benjamin’s regression in age allows them to “meet in the middle” making subtle commentary on the effect age and physical appearance have on relationships. Also impressive is Jason Fleming as Benjamin’s father who abandons him when he is born but keeps a distant eye on him; Taraji Henson as Queenie, a worker at a nursing home who raises Benjamin in spite of his appearance; Tilda Swinton as a somewhat cold, married woman who becomes a brief love interest for Benjamin and Jared Harris as Captain Mike, a tugboat Captain who teaches Benjamin to embrace life.

Overall, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, through telling the tale of a man whose life is clearly different than anyone’s, serves to remind us that we all have our own view of the world and of life as highlighted in Pitt’s narration over the film’s final scenes. With strong performances, an interesting story, impressive visuals and some complex themes of life and age, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a film worthy of attention and should satisfy most audiences.

Rating: 4/5