2011 Final Scorecard

4 STARS
Source Code
Bridesmaids
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Red Dog
Senna
Drive

3 & 1/2 STARS
X-Men: First Class
Super 8
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
The Help
Mission Impossible IV
Money Ball
Real Steel

3 STARS
Captain America: The First Avenger
Arthur
Horrible Bosses
Crazy Stupid Love
Friends With Benefits

2 & 1/2 STARS
Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon
Hanna
Green Lantern
Cowboys & Aliens
Contagion
In Time

2 STARS
Pirates 4: On Stranger Tides
Priest

1 STAR
Soul Surfer
Abduction

Documentary Review: Senna

Ayrton Senna was arguably one of the most capable and instinctive Formula 1 racing drivers since the sport began in 1950. It’s actually quite amazing that it has taken this long for someone to make such a comprehensive documentary of his life since his tragic death at the San Marino Grand Prix in 1994. Finally, with the blessing of Senna’s family, director Asif Kapadia has taken up the challenge and created a captivating piece about a spiritual yet fiercely competitive man and his love of speed. Critically acclaimed, Senna has won prizes at Sundance, the Melbourne International film festival and both the Los Angeles and Adelaide film festivals.

Mainly using televised footage of his races in the 1980’s and early 90’s, interlaced with various interviews and home videos, the narrative uses very little voice-over, allowing the images and Ayrton himself to tell his own story. What emerges is a deeply compelling look at how a young man with talent and ambition literally drove himself, and his McLaren, to the pinnacle of Formula 1 racing. Ayrton’s confidence and spirituality clearly show through in his interviews, giving insight into his compassionate personality and real desire to help his fellow poverty stricken Brazilians. Senna’s legendary rivalry with teammate Alain Prost (that later devolved into all out hostility) is also explored but not overly dramatised, as the final chapter of Ayrton’s life begins with his move to Williams-Renault in 1994 and ends with the fateful San Marino GP.

For those like me who do not follow F1 but knew of Ayrton Senna as a former driver, Senna does a wonderful job of filling in the blanks of his private life and personal torments. Completely indifferent to the complex politics of the sport, he rarely backed down when faced with the beaurocracy of the governing body. From the archival footage of Ayrton’s arguments over safety with race organisers and his genuine concern for the wellbeing of his fellow drivers, we begin to see that while passionately competitive, he was in no way a selfish achiever. A national hero in the eyes of his Brazilian compatriates, the estimated 3 million people who turned out to line the streets as his body was transported to its final resting place is a pure testament to the love and respect his countrymen had for him.

After watching the footage from the practice and qualifying sessions of the '94 San Marino GP, in which Ayrton is physically shaken by the major crashes of Rubens Barrichello and Roland Ratzenberger (who later died from his injuries), his uneasiness is almost palpable. In the past, even after similar major crashes, his personal confidence never seemed to waiver – so why this particular day does he look so strikingly apprehensive about the upcoming race? You can’t help but feel that somehow, in some tiny superconscious way, he may have felt that his time was almost up. I guess we’ll never know.

Senna is a wonderfully engaging documentary that appeals to F1 and non-racing fans alike. Although it could be considered as a 'hero-worship' piece, the way it is told through raw footage (where very little is recounted through 2nd hand accounts) gives it a level of tangible sincerity that almost all other documentaries find difficult to achieve. Senna's tragic demise definitely leaves the viewer with a lasting feeling of sadness that his time was unfairly short and that he was destined to do so much more for his fellow Brazilians after racing. But as is always the case, the candle that burns twice as bright only burns for half as long.

4 STARS

Film Review: Red Dog

Red Dog is an iconically Australian film that, through a cast of rugged yet lovable characters, tells the tale of a true Pilbara legend. Directed by Kriv Stenders (Lucky Country), this is one of only a handful of Australian films to come along since The Castle with a thoroughly endearing story that really pulls at the heartstrings, while also staying true to the spirit of the northwest.

A weary truck driver stops in at a small Dampier hotel to find a large group of locals in anguish over a sick canine. The truckie is immediately struck by how distressed they all are and begins to ask why. As they wait for the vet, one by one the patrons proudly regale their own stories of Red Dog, of how he became their friend and the symbol of iron ore country. As the anecdote's flow as freely as the beer, it becomes clear that Red Dog has touched each one of the local's lives in one way or another and is a treasured member of the community. From the story of how he met his only true master, John (Josh Lucas), to how he helped Vanno the eccentric Italian (Arthur Angel) find love, each tale is an honouring of Red Dog's legend.

There is so much to love about this film. The story is told in such a uniquely Aussie way (at a dusty pub in 1970's Dampier), the visuals of the vast red Pilbara region definitely appeal to Aussie patriotism and the quirky personalities are so easy to like. But the single device that elevates the story above all its other elements is that it's based on true events and a real life red kelpie known as Tally Ho, Bluey or simply, Red Dog. Constructed from anecdotal stories collected by Australian author Nancy Gillespie not long after Red Dog's death in 1979 and a book by British author Louis de Bernieres, the individual parables told by the film's characters are obviously dramatised but still appear to have germinated from a seed of truth. What gives this story real intensity is the hint of credibility from knowing that this was a real dog and these were real people in history.

Written by Daniel Taplitz (an American no less), the story starts out a little bit corny in its introduction of Jack the Publican (Noah Taylor) and the overly stereotypical Italian immigrant, Vanno. However, after the first 10 minutes the 'cheese' melts away and the characters begin to shine in a more authentic way. John Batchelor as Peeto and Angel as Vanno provide excellent comic relief for the more serious storyline of John and Nancy (Rachael Taylor). Thankfully, Red Dog is played by a real canine, Koko, and not animated through CGI, as is the trend in most animal based films nowadays. The classic rock soundtrack also provides an added dimension to the gritty, frontier-ish feel of 70's Dampier.

One thing that I really didn't expect as I sat watching this film was the emotional response. Not one to really get misty about such things as your everyday picture show, I most definitely welled up more than once (although it was perhaps exacerbated by the unstable older lady three rows back who literally bawled for a good 20 minutes - so I may possibly be able to blame it on some sort of sympathy tearage). Nonetheless, I can honestly say that I have not been so viscerally moved by a movie in this way since I was about 5 years old and E.T. almost died. This is when the satisfaction level for me went through the roof. A good movie will make you feel something (other than apathy). A great movie will keep you feeling that emotional high (or low) many days later just from the memory of certain scenes alone - and Red Dog certainly achieves that in spades.

Of all the Australian films to come out in the last few years, for me at least, Red Dog stands easily head and shoulders above the rest. Heartfelt and genuine, it really is a story that focuses solely on the relationships that vastly different and often lonely people forge with animals and each other when times are tough. A definite must see (but bring kleenex).

(Note: Real photos of Red Dog, his Dampier statue and his owner, John Stazzonelli, can be found at this website: http://reddogwa.com/red_dog_old_photos__sketches)

4 STARS

Film Review: Hanna

Hanna is the latest chase thriller from British director Joe Wright (The Soloist, Atonement), and showcases the burgeoning talent of the beautiful Saoirse Ronan (The Lovely Bones). However, with a strong visual style that boldly attempts to fuse frenetic action with both gritty realism and at times, a dreamy surrealism, the result is a fairytale/action mash-up that despite solid performances by Ronan, Blanchett and Bana, always feels on the brink of collapse under the weight of its own ambition.

Hanna (Saoirse Ronan) is a hardened 16 year old with an extraordinary set of skills. Raised and educated by her widowed father Erik (Eric Bana) in the frozen tundra of northern Finland, Hanna’s schooling is comprised primarily of hunting, weapons training, combat tactics and the art of war. A book of fairytales is her only escape from this strict tutelage. As they survive ‘off grid’, ex-CIA operative Erik moulds his daughter into the ultimate assassin as the time finally approaches to unleash vengeance on their unsuspecting enemies.

This film left me with such a mixed reaction. I have to admit that on first leaving the cinema, I was quite amped at what I’d just seen. There’s something exhilarating about a young girl kicking major sphincter (probably none moreso than Kick-Ass's Chloe Moretz as the deadly ‘Mindy’). But as I drove home in the car and thought back on the adventure as a whole, I had a hard time recalling any of the finer plot points other than the central narrative. And then it dawned on me. To quote John Cleese as Mr Creosote’s famous Maître d’, the story was, in the purest terms, “only waffer thin!”

On reflection, it seems that in an attempt to cram the runtime with as much action and surrealism as possible, Wright has had to trade off story and character depth in exchange. So, for a film that basically has three main characters that we actively follow, we barely even get to know two of them. Only Hanna is intimately explored on more than a superficial level and even then, particularly in the case of the family she meets and travels with, the situations were just not mined for their true potential. Blanchett, as the cold blooded CIA agent Marissa, is given very little backstory and we don’t even find out how she really fits in until about three quarters of the way through the film. I've said it before, but if we don’t know who the bad guy really is, what motivates them and most importantly, how far they are willing to go to get what they want, how can we feel that Hanna’s life is truly threatened when they interact? Ultimately, by skimming only the surface of vital characters, the director has unknowingly lowered the stakes and raised our indifference to the antagonist.

So if it had such a flimsy story, I hear you say, why so pumped at the end? Aha, I retort! Because the visual styling and Ronan’s superb acting do a 'Houdini-esque' job in masking the minimalist story. I cannot speak highly enough of Ronan – she is a real talent. And to give them credit, Blanchett and Bana also manage to squeeze a lot more out of their characters than (it appears) was written on the page. Understated as usual, Blanchett is fascinating in her coldness, which is why I am so disappointed that they didn’t use her theatrical abilities to give a more rounded exploration of her character. However, it has to be said that the blonde, East German CIA assassin in the 80’s tracksuit played by Tom Hollander (Pirates 2 & 3) was such an awful cliché that I almost wanted to get up out of my seat, fly to L.A. and slap the writer hard for penning such an awful, awful character. Thank god he was only on screen for a short time.

The other element that really helps to distract from the plotless-ness is the strength of imagery. For all its shortcomings, one thing that this film manages to do well is set a specific visual tone and follow it right through to the end. There’s a bleak, plastic-y fairytale aspect to this film that definitely made it feel fresh when compared to similar films of this genre. The type of action sequences used and the very art-house cinematic design definitely meshed with effect and again, did go some way to hide the superficial storyline.

On a final and disappointing note though, the score by the Chemical Brothers was average and rather forgettable.

So, as a cinema junkie who demands a well written and highly developed story above all other filmmaking components to truly enjoy a movie, I was ultimately let down by the flimsiness of Hanna. For a film to succeed, the screenplay must provide the solid, supporting framework on top of which the action can be stacked, without buckling. In the case of Hanna, the legs simply quivered too many times. Had they have just fleshed out the characters a little more and added an extra subplot or two, this could have really been a classic action thriller. 

However, when all is said and done, the action sequences and acting ability of Ronan/Blanchett ultimately do help to bring Hanna back up a notch toward respectability.

2 & 1/2 STARS

Film Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2

By guest reviewer Jod Burke

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 is the final curtain call for a movie franchise the likes of which we have never seen before and perhaps will never see again. Eight films from seven books (the final book was turned into two movies) that took the world by storm. Harry Potter isn’t just a set of children's books, nor is it just a bunch of movies cashing in on the success of the books, Harry Potter is in fact a bonafide worldwide phenomenon. From Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone arriving on our screens all the way back in 2001 to the Deathly Hallows Part 2, this was a story told over 10 years and so engrossing that it quickly became obvious that this adventure wasn’t just for children.

Deathly Hallows Part 2 was ten years in the making and the film that I was most looking forward to in 2011, being a huge HP fan. Eager anticipation for the final chapter left me chomping at the bit. It is perhaps all these factors combined that led to me being ultimately disappointed as I walked out of the cinema at the end.

David Yates is once again at the helm for his 4th outing with Harry Potter, having previously directed Order of the Phoenix, Half Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows Part 1, and does a fine job of bringing the HP world to life. In the final installment, we pick up exactly where Part 1 left off with Harry, Ron and Hermione searching for the final three Horcruxes (the magical items responsible for the Dark Lord’s immortality) in order to destroy them and finally defeat Voldemort. He Who Should Not Be Named finds out about our protagonist's plan and brings his death eater army together to storm Hogwarts in a battle that will ultimately change their lives forever.

So it’s all set up for the final amazing installment. The icing on the cake, the cheese on your vegemite, the line of coke on Ben Cousins’ coffee table. This is going to be epic right? Right? Well in some ways it was but I'm going to get straight to the point here ladies and gents. Somewhere along the line Steve Kloves, who wrote the screenplay for Deathly Hallows Part 2, dropped the ball. Perhaps it’s not all his fault as no doubt David Yates has to take some of the blame here but my biggest gripe with the film is that some of the absolute key moments in the book, written by JK Rowling, were not conveyed well enough on screen and in some cases completely overlooked. It left me incredibly disappointed with the final installment of a very much loved franchise.

Let me jump back to the books. My favourite character throughout the entire series was always Severus Snape and from start to finish I agonized, like I'm sure many other fans did, as to which side Snape was really on. Was he good? Was he bad? Then, when I finally read Deathly Hallows, I was completely blown away with his fate and his role in the whole series. So much so, I remember I had to stop reading and just think about it for several minutes to take it all in. Without throwing spoilers into this review, I'll tell you now that Snape’s fate was not conveyed as well as it should have been or as well as it deserved to be on film. It was such a key moment in the book and so important to the overall story of the entire series, yet in the film it just all felt very confusing and somewhat rushed.

So too were the fates of other key characters such as Professor Remus, Tonks and Fred Weasley. Again, avoiding spoilers, these three characters, Remus and Fred in particular, were quite a large part of the HP universe and to have their storylines played out behind closed doors only to be quickly filled in later was disappointing to say the least.

Perhaps I'm nitpicking but I'm a huge HP fan and several of the key scenes in the book that I was so looking forward to in the film were either shortened, glossed over or just plain confusing. The final battle between Harry and Voldemort also lacked punch. This is a fight 10 years in the making, all over fairly quickly without the fanfare it deserved. In the end, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 probably suffered from simply having too many characters. Being able to serve each character and bring each character's story arc to a satisfying end is certainly not a job I would want. It is however a job Kloves and Yates took on and in my opinion, fell short.

It is of course not all bad, the visuals and sound are as strong as ever. The score by Alexandre Desplat was once again a highlight. The HP theme is now up there with the likes of Indy, Star Wars and Superman as being instantly recognizable. Performances are again strong, Radcliffe, Watson and Grint are in good form, Matthew Lewis as Neville Longbottom shines as he becomes a somewhat reluctant leader of Gryfindor in the absence of the chosen one. One of HP’s strengths though has always been it’s casting, from the first movie to the last, it’s casting has been near perfect with the likes of Alan Rickman (Snape), Julie Walters (Molly Weasley), Michael Gambon (Albus Dumbledore), Robbie Coltrane (Hagrid) and Helena Bonham Carter (Bellatrix LeStrange). The list goes on and on. It is of course the incredible talent of Ralph Fiennes that steals the show as the utterly frightening Lord VoldemortFiennes is still able to convey Voldemort as vulnerable and scared as much as he is ruthless and cocky. Apparently, he even scared little children playing extras on the set, such was his performance as the Dark Lord.

All in all, I find it hard to give HP7:2 a rating out of five. It certainly was by no means horrible. It was extremely entertaining and as usual some of the set pieces were exciting and visually stunning. They didn’t however take away from the story, which was pleasing. The Gringotts break in and the Room of Requirement fire were standouts. The pacing of the film was better than Part 1, never letting your mind wander. The characters we have come to know and love are all present, it’s well acted and the music is soaring, setting the mood in what is a much darker film than any of the ones we have seen before.

But in this humble reviewers opinion, the most important part of the final book was always the showdown at Hogwarts, the final setting for a story ten years in the making. The final battle felt confusing, rushed, and lacking any real suspense. Too much is going on in the book to perhaps put it all up on screen but so many key moments were overlooked. It just left a sour taste in my mouth. Maybe a second viewing is in order. God knows I've seen the first seven numerous times.

To think there will be no more Harry Potter adventures in the future leaves a large hole in the very fabric of cinema. Here’s hoping JK Rowling isn’t quite done yet.

3 & 1/2 STARS

Film Review: Captain America: The First Avenger

Captain America: The First Avenger is the latest blockbuster offering from Marvel Studios and introduces the final member of The Avengers crime-fighting organisation. Directed by Joe Johnson (Honey, I Shrunk The Kids, The Rocketeer, Jumanji) and set against the backdrop of WWII, Captain America is by far the most artistically stylised Marvel superhero film to date, offering the closest thing to the bold, pulpy look of the original Marvel comic books.

With the release of Captain America, having already introduced the other Avenger team-members - Iron Man, The Hulk and Thor, Marvel has now begun advertising The Avengers, which recently finished filming and is due out in mid 2012. Impressively, The Avengers will see all original actors returning to reprise their respective superhero and sidekick roles, except for Edward Norton, who is to be replaced by Mark Ruffalo as The Hulk.

At the height of World War II, Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is a young man desperate to fight for his country. It’s not that he wants to kill the enemy, he just doesn’t like bullies. Only problem is, he has a physique that makes Tiny Tim look ripped and a million previous health issues. After failing to enlist in several different cities, his determined spirit and lofty ideals come to the attention of Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci), who recruits him to a top secret program. Using his experimental serum, Dr. Erskine scientifically enhances Rogers into a superhuman soldier before the good Doctor is murdered by an assassin from the Nazi splinter group, HYDRA. With his new abilities, Rogers (a.k.a Captain America) leads the fight to bring down HYDRA and its evil leader, Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving), before the Nazi tyrant can unleash an unstoppable supernatural power and take over the world.

More than any other Marvel adventure to date, Captain America includes the most crossover material from the other Marvel superheroes and their co-existant worlds. Immediately distinct is the blue power cube sought by HYDRA, being the very same power source used and lost by the Ice Giants in Thor. Multi-verse characters such as Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) from S.H.I.E.L.D. and Howard Stark, founder of Stark Industries, also feature with effect. Importantly, the writers have been quite adept at seamlessly weaving in these cross-over items, while also keeping them important to the plot.

It has to be said that Marvel and Johnson have managed to create a real comic book feel to this movie that none of the other Marvel films have yet been able to quite capture. The well crafted, slightly sepia-toned WWII backdrop and the styling of HYDRA definitely helps to add a surreal feeling of ‘another time and place’ to the action. The storyline is quite straightforward, but it really needs to be to deliver the large amount of origin information while also providing a palatable action adventure that doesn’t overwhelm audiences with too many new characters and subplots. However, the unintended result of this simplicity is that the story feels somewhat old hat - almost too familiar when compared to many other WWII adventures. This leaves Captain America acutely lacklustre in places.

Something that was very unexpected, for me anyway, was the calibre and style of acting in The First Avenger. For the most part, performances were incredibly restrained and understated, which made for a more intense feel but was somewhat odd for a superhero-styled war film. Chris Evans as Captain America was solid and portrayed the morally confident but personally shy character well. Other mentions have to go to Hugo Weaving as the menacing Schmidt, Tommy Lee Jones as the dry Colonel Phillips and Hayley Atwell as the stoic Peggy Carter. However, the most memorable performance (for me at least) was Stanley Tucci as the unfortunately short-lived Dr. Erskine.

Captain America succeeded in providing a detailed character origin film, together with an explosion-filled adventure war story, while still remaining in the confines of the Marvel style. However, to a somewhat lessor degree than Wolverine or Thor, it still suffered a little from ‘origin-itis’ – this being the cinematic ailment where the entire first half of the film is taken up with solely introducing the character and his superpower, leaving only half of the runtime to cram in an interesting action storyline. The result is the feeling of a rushed second half action sequence, where the story is forced to hurtle at breakneck speed toward the final showdown.

All in all, Captain America was an entertaining war story with its fair share of explosive action and a strong thematic style. While not incredibly innovate, the production team's decision to stay true to the graphic novel style will definately be appreciated by the Marvel purists. Hopefully, with all of the origin stories now divulged in detail, fans can look forward to The Avengers following a more traditional, start-to-finish action narrative.

Oh, and hang around for the end of the credits for a sneak peak at The Avengers.

3 STARS

Film Review: Bridesmaids

Bridesmaids is the first female-centric comedy to emerge in recent years and proves once again that great writing is the absolute key to a great film. Penned and acted by Kristen Wiig, formerly of SNL fame, directed by Paul Feig and guided by comedic genius Judd Apatow, Bridesmaids finds the perfect balance between character depth, great casting, fresh gags and a touch of awkward truth.

Annie (Kristen Wiig) is a hapless 30-something woman with a dead-end job, dead-end quasi-boyfriend (Jon Hamm) and a generally dead-end life. The only person who understands her is Lillian (Maya Rudolph), her best friend. After announcing her engagement, Lillian asks the self-doubting Annie to be her Maid of Honour, which only serves to bring Annie’s hopeless love life and organisational ineptitude into sharp focus. Add to this Lillian’s other ‘best friend’, Helen (Rose Byrne), whose financial success, managerial skill, backhanded compliments and patronising smile combine to make Annie’s life a pure living hell. Bent on being the best Maid of Honour she can be, Annie soldiers on through disaster after disaster, while also trying to muddle through her own inherent personal dilemas.

The first thing that jumps out at you about Bridesmaids is there are no A-List stars involved. The main cast is primarily made up of rising comedy names, SNL regulars, stand-up comedians and unknowns. So why does this film work so well? Pure and simple – the characters.

The raw comedy prowess of Wiig, developed over years at SNL, together with the tried-and-true structural comedy knowledge of Apatow (The 40 Year Old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up) combine to create a well crafted, hilarious, character driven story where every decision comes directly from within the character and not from the needs of the plot. This is something lacking from many of today’s comedies and is the sole reason many of them feel so thin and weak. Where Bridesmaids differs is evident in the airplane, dress-shopping and bridal shower speech scenes where the comedy situations come directly from character flaws, decisions and actions, not because the story needs pepping up with a gross-out comedy set piece.

While all of the ensemble actors put in solid performances, one of the standouts has to be newcomer Melissa McCarthy, playing the blunt and no-nonsense Megan. The chubby yet feisty bridesmaid is not afraid to suggest a Fight Club for a hen’s night or brazenly proposition a suspected Air Marshall during a flight, providing some of the best comedy relief moments of the film. Rose Byrne as the control freak ‘other best friend’ and Chris O’Dowd as the soft, goofy cop were also top notch.

What stands Bridesmaids apart from your average chick flick, and vastly helped its financial success I’m sure, is that it definitely appeals to men as well as women. I would venture to say that this comes from the fact that most of the female characters (apart from perhaps Helen) are in some small way almost tom-boyish in nature. With more aggressive and hopelessly pathetic personalities rather than girly and bitchy, men are given a better chance to understand the characters and stay engaged. The odd poop gag helps too. The only overall negative about the film was that it felt a little long at over 2 hours and could have possibly been tightened up a bit.

Bridesmaids was definitely a surprise for me and absolutely deserves its high critical praise. Equally entertaining for both sexes, this intelligent comedy is a hilariously satirical gem with heartfelt characters and a quality cast. A must see.

4 STARS

Film Review: Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon

Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon is the third and final episode in the Transformers trilogy, once again directed by action-mayhem masochist, Michael Bay. In this installment, Bay has managed to do something that many thought was impossible - that is, to elevate the amount of deafening, explosive carnage to a level that makes the D-Day landings at Normandy look and sound like a 4 year-old's tea party. In a nutshell, this film is pure noise.

The adventure kicks off with a long lost Cybertronian spacecraft (The Ark) crash landing on the lunar surface in the 1950's, resulting in an intriguing counter-factual explanation for the race to put man on the moon. What Armstrong and Aldrin find is a deactivated Sentinel Prime, the original leader of the Autobots. Jumping to the present, Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) is given information about the Apollo cover story and the Autobots learn of The Ark, where they quickly set out to locate Sentinel Prime and bring him to Earth. However, once re-activated, Sentinel Prime (voiced by Leonard Nimoy) doesn't turn out to be the moral leader he once was and the situation quickly devolves into another fight for the survival of humanity.

In typical Michael Bay style, the visual effects in this film are simply epic. Ear-piercing explosions literally rain down on the audience for the vast majority of the the 2 and a half hour runtime. Now I, for one, relish the spectacle of entire skyscrapers being consumed by gigantic squid-like Decepticons - however, I've since come to learn that many others, most of whom value and cherish their eardrums, do not share my excitement. And so, the inexorable question that naturally arises from this dichotomy of opinion is; do the striking visuals and constant action make up for the films other shortcomings?

In terms of story, the first 15 minutes are quite engaging where, in X-Men: First Class style, fictional conspiracy is mixed liberally with fact. The inclusion of the space race as a cover for the discovery of the The Ark was somewhat clever. However, from there the story just declines into loose filler for the parts when something isn't on fire. For example, the coincidences that lead to Sam learning about The Ark are so unnecessary, i.e. - Sam's new girlfriend (Carly) works for a millionaire (Dylan) who, to win favour with Carly, sets up a job interview for Sam with Bruce, another millionaire who owns a technology company. Jerry, a senior guy who works for Bruce at the tech company, flips out and gets the top secret info to Sam about the Apollo missions and The Ark... and off we go. It just feels so painfully contrived and drawn out. Why can't Jerry get the info to Sam without all the crap in between? In any case, the plot in action films is normally pretty flimsy so what were we expecting, right?

Next cab off the rank is the acting. In the first Transformers, Shia LaBeouf as Sam was somewhat endearing. In the second film, his jabbering outbursts began to get annoying. In this film, I just want to smack him on the back of the head. Hard. With a cement mixer. Whiny, pathetic characters can only garner pity for about 30% of one film before audiences tire and of it and start yelling at the screen. Three films in and this guy still moans like a little bitch at everything; "A rich guy is macking on my uber hot supermodel girlfriend... I hate living in this trendy uptown loft paid for in full by my uber hot supermodel girlfriend... getting a job is so hard... my parents embarrass me... this Presidential medal for valour is giving me a neck strain." Boo-fucking-hoo. At least when the explosions began to get serious and my eardrums perforated, I didn't need to listen to all his whining anymore.

Exceptional performances are delivered by John Malkovich as Bruce Bezos, Frances McDormand as the Secretary of Defense and John Turturo returning as the wacky Agent Seymour Simmons. However, it has to be said that the stunning-but-woeful Rosie Huntington-Whitley should stick to modelling lingerie and the casting manager should be shot after designating 'Dr. McDreamy' Patrick Dempsey as perfect for the bad guy, Dylon Gould. Annoyingly, the only actor in this film with real acting clout, John Malkovich, was given such a tiny role that he is afforded no chance to really shine. This, on top of the fact that his part had absolutely no bearing on the storyline and had he been removed altogether, it wouldn't have made a single lick of difference to the plot. What they should have done is switched Malkovich with Dempsey, making McDreamy the slightly eccentric nobody and inserting 'Teddy KGB' as the bad guy. Now that would have made more sense.

And finally, we come to the transformers themselves. Once again, as in the second film, a glut of new transformers on both sides pop up out of nowhere. We have no idea who they are and have very little time to learn anything about them. So when the fighting starts, we can't follow who's who and don't know whether to cheer or be sad when the 'red-guy' gets his head ripped off. The complete lack of Megatron and his downgrading to some kind of 'Phantom of the Opera' type retard was also supremely disappointing.

Overall, and like the other Transformer films before it, simply put, Dark of the Moon is what it is - a chaotic action film about giant robots with feelings slugging it out in the ultimate battle of good versus evil. If you want a complex love story, a plot that makes perfect sense, deep characters and Oscar winning performances, you've just wasted $13 my friend. However, if you want crisp graphics, robots being blown to bits, Victoria Secret lingerie model eye candy and explosions that rattle your wisdom teeth, then hold on tight and start that savings plan for a cochlear implant.

Additional Note: Can I just say how jaded I am that in the entire 3 Transformers films, the word 'Energon' was not used once. If I recall, in virtually every episode of transformers I watched as a kid, the Decepticons were after energon, found a way to steal it and started filling cubes of it right as the Autobots turned up to thwart them. Yet, in the films - nada energon. Biggest disappointment of all.

2 & 1/2 STARS

Film Review: Super 8



When a young rising visionary collaborates with a similarly styled cinematic master, expectations are lofty indeed. With the fresh and edgy approach of J.J. Abrams (Lost, Star Trek) directing a youthful and nostalgic, Steven Spielberg produced action-adventure, expectations are nothing less than sub-orbital. As a result, while fun and thoroughly entertaining, Super 8 inevitably falls just short of its anticipated greatness.

Set in a small Ohio town in 1979, Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) and his intrepid friends are filming a movie project on location, when a train is deliberately derailed nearby. Shortly after the military arrives to contain the situation, strange electrical disturbances and disappearances begin to happen. Our adolescent crew and a concerned Deputy attempt to unravel the mystery of the train’s contents, but are ultimately unprepared for what has been unleashed on the town and its inhabitants.

Super 8 is easily recognisable as an homage piece to the early works of Spielberg. While in no way a carbon copy, there is definitely a noticeable tip of the hat to The Goonies, E.T. and Close Encounters, with a touch of Lost thrown in to boot. Inadvertently, this familiarity very nearly overwhelms the fact that this is actually a likeable, well-acted and entertaining family adventure.

However, while Super 8 doesn’t quite reach its full potential, its charming innocence and retro style makes it the closest contender in most recent times to those timeless Spielberg classics. Oh, and make sure to stay for the credits.

3 & 1/2 STARS  

Film Review: X-Men: First Class

X-Men: First Class is the second prequel in the popular Marvel series and delivers many features that Origins: Wolverine didn’t. Helmed by Kick-Ass director, Matthew Vaughn, First Class displays a combination of engaging characterisation, a swift story, decent effects and some imaginative historical interlacing.

Charismatic Erik Lehnsherr (played by Michael Fassbender) is hunting the ex-Nazi Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), to exact revenge for personal Auschwitz atrocities. After fortuitously crossing paths with Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), the pair team up and begin recruiting other young mutants to foil Shaw’s plans of nuclear armageddon.

The most organic element to this film by far was the relationship between Xavier and Lehnsherr. The performances by McAvoy and Fassbender are top notch and really do pay justice to the deep friendship that these now-foes originally had. However, an unintended effect of this meticulous development is that in comparison, most of the other characters come off as slightly shallow and one dimensional.

With an Origins film we expect backstories, and First Class definitely delivers. Many questions about how mutants met or where they came from are neatly explained. Unfortunately, the vast amount of this exposition does make the story feel rushed in places and the studio’s strict release timeline most likely accounts for Magneto’s curious switch to an Irish accent 20 minutes from the end.

Overall, First Class aptly returns the X-Men franchise to its recognisable roots of stylised characters and ceaseless action, with a smidgeon of moralistic commentary.

3 & 1/2 STARS