An Education

Year: 2009
Director: Lone Scherfig
Cast: Carey Milligan, Peter Sarsgaard, Domonic Cooper, Rosamund Pike, Alfred Molina, Cara Seymour

In My Own Words
Tonight I finally got to see the performance of Carey Mulligan in “An Education”, a role that has had many people suggesting that an Oscar nomination is well on its way. Miss Mulligan is one of those stars who has had a solid acting career, yet has not found actual stardom outside the UK until now. It has been a big year for her with the release of “Public Enemies” and “An Education”, and the release of “Brothers” not too far away. The hype is true, she really is brilliant in this film and steals the show.

I really enjoyed this film. It may be a movie more for girls than boys, as it is a coming-of-age drama about a young girl, and addresses issues that young girls faced pre-feminism. The movie also makes you realize how important education is of any kind, whether it be through school books or through enriched life experience. The movie is based on Lynn Barber’s memoir, but there are quite a few things changed in order for it to work on the big screen, and these changes worked well. The film is moving, entertaining and, dare I say it, educational. It seems like a while since I saw a film at the cinemas which really made me happy to watch and observe all the wonderful things about it. I would be absolutely delighted to see this film and Mulligan considered for Academy Awards come 2010.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“An Education” is based on the memoirs written by Lynn Barber and written for the screen by Nick Hornby, writer of “About A Boy” and “High Fidelity”. Jenny (Carey Mulligan) is a bright sixteen year old whose parents (Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour) have high hopes for her to attend Oxford. Although Jenny does see Oxford in her future, her mind is also consumed with her cello and everything French. Her life is turned upside down when she accepts a lift home from the charming David (Peter Sarsgaard). David, although 15 years her senior, takes her to fancy restaurants, away for weekends in the country and concerts, all the while completely charming and winning over her parents and making Jenny fall in love with him and her world. Before long, Jenny starts to notice that there are many questions that have gone unanswered about David’s world and that she may well need to choose between David or her dream of Oxford. Like many other teenagers on the verge of adulthood, she also realizes that her parents may not always know best.

Although this movie may sound like much like a typical teenage drama, it is presented far from it. It shows the transformation from a young schoolgirl into a woman of the world in a very grown up way, thanks to both fantastic direction from Lone Scherfig and amazing performances by the cast. Scherfig captures the 1960’s in a perfect manner and chooses a perfect soundtrack to back up what is happening on screen. The cinematography is amazing, such as the camera angles and shots. The choice of camera angles on Jenny help support her personal journey by showing her changing persona. However, the ending of the film may not be suited to everyone’s taste. Some people may feel satisfied with it while others may be left feeling as though the movie ends flat.

The best part of the film is defiantly the performances by the cast. Mulligan is the star of the film. As Jenny, she is charming, likeable and a joy to watch. She perfectly transforms from a young schoolgirl to a woman, whilst still regaining an air of youth and also naivety. Although in real life Mulligan is actually 24, you would find this very hard to believe when watching her on screen. Alfred Molini is also a stand out as Jenny’s father, who is protective of her and concerned about her future. Rosamund Pike, who plays David’s friend and Jenny’s some-what mentor in David’s world Helen, is also praise worthy. She supplies lots of humorous moments to the film and is an audience favourite. “An Education” also features Emma Thompson as the disliked headmistress of Jenny’s school and Sally Hawkins, star of “Happy-Go-Lucky”, also makes a cameo.

“An Education” is a beautiful film which contains both humorous and dramatic moments. The film and its cast are definitely of the Oscar caliber and it is worth seeing on the big screen to grasp the full emotion and strength it generates.

8.5/10

The Invention Of Lying

The Invention Of Lying
Year: 2009
Director: Ricky Gervais and Matthew Robinson
Cast: Rickey Gervais, Jennifer Garner, Jonah Hill, Rob Lowe, Tina Fey

In My Own Words
The main reason I wanted to see this movie was to see one of my heroes, Tina Fey back on the big screen. All five minutes of her on screen it turned out, but I knew I wouldn’t mind watching Ricky Gervais once again, especially after his hilarious performance in “Ghost Town” last year.

It turned out that this review was going to be one of the harder ones to write, which I was totally unaware of before I went to see the movie. The reason being is that I am a Christian, and this movie does poke fun at religion, especially aspects of Christianity. I know some people who would take offence to most of the second half of the movie. I was a little offended, but I tried not to take it too seriously. The movie in itself is a story, it’s not a story that is meant to be taken literary. That is the way I looked at it anyway. Although, unlike most comedy movies of its kind, it will evoke many a conversation between people who go to see it afterwards. Some people may think it makes some valid points about religion (if you are atheist anyway) and some people may think that it just makes some valid points about human nature and existence. I did think that it made some valid points about the latter, which I definitely did talk about after the movie over dinner.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“The Invention Of Lying” is the motion picture directorial debut from British comic, Ricky Gervais. Mark Bellison (Gervais) is a single, lonely man living in a world where everyone tells the truth, and it is inconceivable to speak of what isn’t. When things are at their very worst for Mark after being rejected by Jennifer (Jennifer Garner), losing his job and being told he is being evicted from his apartment, he finds that he is able to lie, and because nobody else in his world has ever lied before, he can finally live the life he has always dreamed of. He find that by lying, he can not only make his life better, but he can also make life better for other people. However, he finds even though lying can initially have benefits, those benefits do not last.

The film is quite clever and very well written, as one would expect from Gervais. There are some great laughs in the film, especially in the first half. The concept of a world where no one lies is more like a world where everyone says it as it is, rather than just telling the truth. The folk in this town that the movie is based in reveal all their thoughts when they talk each other, such as people waiters telling patrons that they are embarrassed to be there and how they want to ask a girl for her number. The people can come across quite rude as a result, but that adds to the humour. Gervais is hilarious in his role as Mark, while it is not Garner’s best role. She comes across as weak and at times, very annoying. The film is packed with cameos such as Tina Fey, in a tiny role as mark’s secretary and one that does not seem to fit her after becoming familiar with her as television show producer Liz Lemon in “30 Rock”. Philip Seymour Hoffman makes a hilarious cameo as a bartender, as does Jason Bateman as the doctor.

This may not be a film for everyone, particularly those who are religious, as during the film, there are references to religion and its origins not being true. However, there are quite a few holes in the story as a result of this. Of course, the idea of no religion in the world of the world in non-existent, but this is not supposed to be a true story. There are also references to marriage before there is any mention of the “Man in the Sky”, and marriage is considered an institution related to religion, in many cases anyway. So some people may want to avoid the movie for this reason, but the movie, just like the things Mark says in the film, is just a story and should not be taken seriously. Particularly as it is a comedy movie. The movie does have some morals that should be taken home in it and even though it pokes fun at religion at times , it does also make some good points about how religion can do good in society and peoples lives.

This film may not be for everyone for the above reason, but it has got some very funny moments in it. The jokes tend to get less funny towards the end of the movie, but the first half will give the audience loads of laughs.

5.5/10

Rising Stars

Anna Kendrick


Many of you may recognise this face as being that of Jessica from the inescapable Twilight Saga. However, you may not yet know that Anna Kendrick's acting career extends far beyond that of playing the supporting role of Bella's mortal friend in "Twilight" and "New Moon". There been whispers that she may be up for an Oscar nomination for her role in the upcoming film, "Up In The Air".

Anna Kendrick was born on the 9th of August 1985 in Portland, Maine. She became a victim of the acting bug at a young age after performing in several local productions. When she was 10, she was discovered by a talent agency, and by 13, the industry had sat up and taken notice of this new Broadway star. At this age, she starred in the Broadway version of "High Society" as the spirited Dinah. For this performance, she earned a Tony nomination for Best Actress in a Musical. She unfortunately did not take home the prize, but instead she took home a new reputation, that of being the second youngest Tony nominee of all time.


Kendrick then took a few years off acting to complete her schooling. Come 2007, she then started her career in film. She starred in the film "Rocket Science" as Ginny, a star high school debater. After this performance, she was cast as Jessica in the highly successful "Twilight" series. After being in the first two installments of the saga, she is cast for the third film, "Eclipse", to be released in June 2010. It is her performance as Natalie, the young business woman in "Up In The Air" that has made the world realise that Kendrick is not just another actor whose career cannot extend beyond a pop culture phenomenon. The film itself is already an Oscar favourite and Kendrick is tipped for a nomination in the Best Supporting Actress category.



Anna Kendrick is a young actor who's acting abilities extend far beyond the simple character of Jessica and with her upcoming roles will prove this to all that disbelieve.

Peoples Choice Awards

Remember to vote for your favourite movie and movie stars in the 34th Peoples Choice Awards!

http://www.peopleschoice.com/pca/votenow.jsp

Rising Stars

Sam Worthington

For Movie Critical’s first Rising Star, we have chosen Sam Worthington. Worthington shot to international stardom with his role as Marcus Wright in “Terminator Salvation” and plays the lead of Jake Sully in the highly anticipated “Avatar”. He is quickly becoming one of the most recognised action stars in film today, but his roots don't lie in this film genre, as many Australian film fans will know.

Worthington was born in Perth, Australia on the 2nd of August 1976. He did not always aspire to be an actor, but his life changed when he accompanied a friend to his audition at the National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA). NIDA is known for being extremely hard to win a place in, so they must've seen something very special in Worthington as he was accepted, while his friend wasn't. After starting his career on stage, he was soon being cast in roles in such Australian TV shows as "Water Rats" and "Blue Heelers".

His first film role was in "Bootmen", a film in which he has admitted to not learning much about tap dancing during, even though that is what the film is about. This was followed by roles in "Dirty Deeds", "Gettin' Square" and "Thunderstruck". However, in 2004,it was his role in the multi AFI award winning film "Somersault" that won him critical acclaim and secured his place in amongst Australia's acting elite. He won the Australian Film Institute's award for Best Actor in A Leading Role and from here the sky was the limit.Before entering the USA market, he also played the lead in the 2006 film version of "Macbeth" and also appeared in the giant crocodile film,"Rogue".













Since then, Worthington stole the show in "Terminator Salvation" and hasn't looked back. Besides "Avatar", he is also starring in the upcoming "Clash Of The Titans" which is to be released in early 2010. Worthington, for the time being, has seemed to find his niche in action film, but from he previous roles it is clear to see that he will not have a problem fitting into other film genres in the future.

The Twilight Saga: New Moon

The Twilight Saga: New Moon
Year: 2009
Director: Chris Weitz
Cast: Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart, Taylor Lautner

In My Own Words
Here it is, the awaited follow up to “Twilight”. Well, it will not have been awaited if you are not a Twilight fan and the first thing I will say about this movie before I tell you my own thoughts and my experience with this movie is that this movie is NOT for you if you are not a fan of Twilight. My boyfriend who followed me along for the special midnight screening gave it a 2/10, he was not impressed. I, myself, have tried not to become part of the “Twilight” phenomenon, but I have been drawn in, more by the books than the movies though. I did enjoy “Twilight” when that came out at the cinemas last year, I thought it was enjoyable. Sure it wasn’t the best movie ever made and does not rival “Gone With The Wind”, but it was fun to watch nevertheless.

My boyfriend bought tickets for me for the midnight screening at my local cinema as I wanted to review it before the majority of the world. Also I had never been to a midnight screening of anything so it was very exciting! Although I did go to the 9am first screening of “The Lord Of The Rings: The Return Of The King” when that opened, but this was a bit more exciting at night for some strange reason. I was shocked, I have never seen my local cinemas so packed. They had six cinemas all sold out, all by people (mostly girls) under the age of 25. It can be hard to take a movie seriously when you have some groups of girls showing off to their friends by laughing at parts in the movie which aren’t even funny and are supposed to be serious. That was something that I was prepared for though.

So, as far as the film went, not as good as the original “Twilight”. Nowhere near as cheesily enjoyable as it was. And I repeat, stay away from this movie if you do not like “Twilight” at all, it won’t change you mind. However, if you are a “Twilight” fan, it is still worth seeing and you may find some happiness and enjoyment seeing Edward, Bella and Jacob on the big screen again.

These are my own words and this is my review.

Review
There is no escaping the “Twilight” phenomenon, especially leading up to the release of “New Moon”, the second installment of the saga. The film, whether it is good or not, will make millions worldwide in the box office from fans going to watch it numerous times. However, movie goers who go to watch the film who either did not like the first film or didn’t see it, will be completely dissatisfied and confused. The movie makes no sense without the first film and will not appeal to those who are not fans of Edward and Bella to begin with.

In the second film, eighteen year old Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and her vampire boyfriend, Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) have carried on their relationship despite their differences and the fact that Bella was nearly killed by a fellow vampire in the previous movie. After another close call, this time with members of the Cullen family, Edward decides that it is best for him to leave Forkes and Bella. Bella is left heartbroken and finds comfort in her friend, Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner). However, she then finds out that Jacob has a secret of his own. Jacob, despite his feelings for her, does not fill the void left in her heart by Edward. The film will delight Twilight fans. It stays true to the book and makes the most of each of the main characters.

However, as a stand alone film, it fails. As it is the follow on to “Twilight”, there is really no character development or explanations as to why things are happening in the film. The actors make the most of their roles, and make all there is to make out of their characters. Stewart can be painful sometimes as the emotional Bella, but that is the way that Bella is written in Stephanie Meyer’s book and plays the part perfectly when compared to the literature Bella. Pattinson and Lautner’s performances are not spectacular, but do not do a bad job. Ashley Greene’s role as Alice Cullen is probably the most interesting role and has the most variation to work with. However, it is not until the end that Dakota Fanning and Michael Sheen show up and their roles are both rushed and almost non-existent.

The change of director for this movie does not work well for the saga. Weitz does not do the film much justice and one can only hope that the change of director to David Slade for the next film, “Eclipse” will be advantageous. However, the visuals of Forkes are stunning, even though it was filmed in Canada. The soundtrack is also fitting. It is just a shame that there is no suspense and complete predictability throughout the whole film to overshadow it.

Again, avid “Twilight” fans will still enjoy the film and there is no doubt it will be one of the biggest box office hits for the year. The movie unfortunately does not live up to the hype and the spectacle is greater than the film itself.

5.5/10

2012

2012
Year: 2009
Director: Roland Emmerich
Cast: John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Danny Glover, Woody Harrelson, Oliver Platt

In My Own Words
When “2012” was announced, I groaned. Another world disaster movie. It doesn’t seem to be something Hollywood tires of very easily, or at all. The heroes, the villains, the special effects, the demolition of large cities….all pre-requisites for disaster movies. Today was the only day I could have gone and seen the movie as it requires a full three hours of your time, a reason many people will probably not go and see it. I caught the early session so it didn’t take up too much of my day off.

I was hoping this movie may pleasantly surprise me as I am a John Cusack fan. It wasn’t the worst movie ever, but when it comes down to it, wasn’t original at all. That will never score many points with movie-goers. As I said, wasn’t to worst movie that I’ve seen this year, it did have some good points, but its length and unoriginality do not make it a masterpiece by any means.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
The well known premonition of the world ending is the basis and just another reason to make the newest disaster movie “2012”. The film itself is like a tsunami, volcano, flood, and earthquake film rolled into one, with the 2 and a half hours to carry each one. There are some good points about this movie, but it is really what is to be expected from a film such as this. However, it is entertaining and is definitely worth seeing the film in the cinema for its special effects.

The movie begins in 2009 and shows how the world is preparing for the end of the world as we know it in 2012. However, the end is closer than people think, as discovered by Adrian Helmsley ( Chiwetel Ejiofor) , who alerts the American government. The protagonist of the story is California writer, Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) who has taken his two children to Yellowstone National Park, where they stumble upon a top secret government “hot spot” and he finds out about the 2012 conspiracy. He, his children and ex-wife (Amanda Peet) survive the demolition of his hometown by many close calls to try and join in the survival of the human race. As expected, the film contains loads of special effects, some which seem more realistic than others. This may have something to do with the unrealistic scenes in which the unrealistic special effects occur in. There are several times in the movie that the lead characters have near misses. One can believe one or two near misses to keep the suspense, but too many can lead to the audience rolling their eyes and sarcastically thinking “Wow, I did NOT see that one coming”. It is almost exhausting how many things happen in the film and how long the film is doesn’t make tit any better.

However, the acting in “2012” is really not too bad. Cusack gives a good performance, as does Ejiofor and Morgan Lily, who plays Lilly Curtis, gives a great performance at such a young age. Roland Emmerich’s direction and script is also commendable. There is great character development with the main characters and the audience does indeed connect with them. The role of Carl Anheuser, as played by Oliver Platt, is particularly unlikable and well played for this reason. It is proof that the characters are really forming a relationship with the audience when one feels such dislike towards one of them.

The film does have some good points, as pointed out, but its lack of original content does let it down.

5/10

A Christmas Carol

A Christmas Carol
Year: 2009
Director: Robert Zemekis
Cast: Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Robyn Wright-Penn

My Own Words
Welcome to Christmas! That’s what I saw this movie as representing. The start of the Christmas media season. I’m actually surprised it wasn’t released at the beginning of December rather than the beginning of November.

Anyway, I was very excited about seeing this movie. I love the story of “A Christmas Carol”, although, sadly, I have never read the book. I really should get around to that one day. There have been over 35 films based on Charles Dickens novel. However, I have only seen two of them. Those being “Mickey’s Christmas Carol” and “The Muppets Christmas Carol”, both of which I love. This version which I saw tonight, was a very different interpretation. In saying that though, I did really enjoy it and thought it was a great movie.

The one thing I have to say about this movie and is a bit of a warning to parents out there or people who were contemplating taking children to see this, it is not as child friendly as it appears. There are some pretty frightening parts in it for children. One of my friends took her three year old to see it the other day and as she was buying the tickets, the attendant told her that if the movie gets too scary for Bailey, feel free to bring him back out and she will refund her money. Apparently this had been the case with quite a few small children. But little Bailey soldiered on. He apparently got scared in a few bits, but was happy to stay until the end. In other words, “A Christmas Carol” is more of an adult animation. There were even bits I thought were a bit too full on!

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
The latest interpretation of Charles Dicken’s masterpiece, “A Christmas Carol” comes at the hand of Robert Zemekis. The new, animated version of the timeless classic is beautifully made and is an extremely unique interpretation that still remains true to the original story. It exhibits how much computer generated animation can now achieve and is truly impressive.

For those that don’t know the story, Ebenezer Scrooge( Jim Carrey) lives a lonely life consumed by his wealth and greed. On Christmas Eve, he is visited by his past and long dead business partner who informs him that tonight he will be visited by three ghosts, the Ghost of Christmas Past, the Ghost of Christmas Present and the Ghost of Christmases Yet To Come. This version is quite dark and at times, can be disturbing. Although it is by the Disney company and looks harmless enough, it is definitely not a children’s movie. There are several images that would not seem out of place in a horror movie in terms of their fright factor, especially those of Jacob Marley.

However, the images, gruesome or not in some parts, are amazing. This film is definitely a credit to Zemekis and his direction. It is clearly obvious on screen who Jim Carrey is, as well as Gary Oldman in his portrayal of Bob Cratchit and Colin Firth as Scrooge’s nephew, Fred. Carrey’s Scrooge is extremely well constructed as it shows his sadistic and pessimistic nature right down to the tiniest detail, and the changes throughout the movie to the character are well portrayed. Even though it is animation, it is still very easy to pickup on Carrey’s mannerisms and facial expressions. Credit must be paid to him for portraying an old man so successfully, even if it is in animation!

The only criticism with “A Christmas Carol” is that it can feel in some sequences that Zemekis is trying to show off the amazing things that animation is able to do these days. This can lead to some sequences being longer than they have to be. However, in saying this, these sequences are still beautiful and it is indeed amazing what animation of this kind can do nowadays. Otherwise, it is extremely hard to find another criticism for this movie. It is a movie that everyone should see before Christmas and is likely to get you in the Christmas spirit. Just don’t expect it to be light and fluffy because it is clearly not a happy Christmas movie for the majority of the film. The film is dark, but it is still incredibly beautiful and a great version of a classic using modern technology.

8.5/10

The Time Traveler's Wife

The Time Traveler’s Wife
Year: 2009
Director: Robert Shwentke
Cast: Eric Bana, Rachel McAdams

In My Own Words
Another film I had been looking forward to for a long time. I read “The Time Traveler’s Wife” at about this time last year while I was travelling in the USA. I really enjoyed the book written by Audrey Niffenegger. Although, I knew two things going into the movie. One was, the movie is very rarely as good as the book, so my expectations weren’t too high. Two, I knew it would be really hard to carry out a lot of the things in the book on the screen. So before going into the movie, I was guessing a lot of the ways in which director, Robert Shwentke would translate. Oh…and I was also expecting some tears! Especially if Rachel McAdams was able to carry out the same sort of performance she gave in “The Notebook” back in 2004. I was impressed with the casting of her and Eric Bana in the lead roles as the physically resembled the images I had seen of Henry and Clare in my mind whilst I was reading the book.
However, there were no tears. The trailer was a bigger tear-jerker than this movie. I don’t like crying, but crying in a movie is sometimes a good thing as it symbolizes the movie making emotional connection with the audience. In other words, a success! There was also many unanswered questions at the end of the movies for those who had not read the novel. So, you can see in which direction I will be going with this review.
These are my words and this is my review.

Review
Based on the best-selling novel by Audrey Niffenegger, “The Times Traveler’s Wife” is ultimately about the love between the time traveler, Henry and Clare. Henry has a genetic disorder that enables him to involuntarily travel back and forwards in time, which obviously causes strain on his relationship with Clare, who has to cope with his unexpected absences and unwelcome surprises. Fans of the novel would have been eagerly awaiting the release of this movie. However, like many movies based on novels, it does not reach the same heights and emotions that the book does. It was inevitable that “The Time Traveler’s Wife” was going to be turned into a romantic drama on the big screen and it was also inevitable that it would be difficult to be successful, but this interpretation has not done it much justice at all.

The direction of Robert Schwentke is, for one, commendable in this film. The locations in Chicago and the sets used are perfect for the film. Each scene is well edited and the special effects are also well done. There really are some beautiful images in the film, such as those of open meadows and falling snow. However, this is as far as the brilliance goes. The main thing that is missing from the film is the emotion. One would consider a film in which a woman is constantly losing and missing her husband and goes through several other traumatic experiences to be a tear jerker of sorts. However, there are few moments that the audience actually connects with the film and feels and emotional connection with the characters and their situations. Even the end, which should not leave a dry eye in the house, is lack lustre and not as heart warming as it should be. This is the major downfall of the movie. As said before, “The Time Traveler’s Wife” was always going to be a hard novel to convert to a movie, but the movie should pull emotion just with the same subject content.

The acting is also disappointing, which is a shame considering it is Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams in the lead. Bana is not bad as Henry, but he still could have taken the role much further, as is the case with co-star McAdams. The best acting throughout the whole movie from McAdams is right at the very beginning when she see’s Henry for the first time in the library. Her face completely fills with happiness and makes one excited about what is yet to come. The two look perfect on screen as Henry and Clare, yet there is very little character development and they do not succeed in gaining any empathy from the audience.

Overall, “The Time Traveler’s Wife” was a disappointment. Perhaps it will be more of a disappointment to those who have read rather than to those why are flying blind when entering the cinema. So much more could have been done with this film than was. Maybe the movie will be remade in another few years and will be more of a success then.

5/10

The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus

The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus
Year: 2009
Director: Terry Gilliam
Cast: Heath Ledger, Christopher Plummer, Lily Cole, Tom Waits, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, Colin Farrell

In My Own Words
Another movie I had the pleasure of seeing for free as I also won tickets to this! I did not know much about this movie when I walked into the cinema. All I really knew about it was that it was a fantasy and that it was Heath Ledger’s last movie. This fact in itself will draw crowds to see it. The movie itself, I found interesting. It was one of those movies that I go home and look up information about, particularly about how the film managed to be finished without one of the main characters. From doing this, it was easy to see how the films opening was a great deal delayed. The script had to be rewritten and Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell had to be brought in. I won’t go into the reasons why these actors were brought in, as it would definitely contain spoilers for those who plan to see the movie. However, it is admirable that this movie was finally released, as many movies become unfinished projects when one of the leads dies in the middle of filming. For example, 1962 movie “Something’s Got To Give” remains unfinished due to the death of Marilyn Monroe.

I’m glad I saw this movie, as it is not often a movie comes out like “The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus”. It was something different and although not a movie I would go out and buy on DVD, was a pleasant watch. However, it is slightly odd, or very odd, depending on what you are into.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus” is a clever, visually stunning fantasy movie, that some will adore, but it will also seem a little too far fetched for others. If you enjoy films that combine the modern world with fantasy without crossing over into the sci-fi genre, this movie may well be for you. While fantasy fans will flock to see this film, so will many others just to watch Heath Ledger in his last performance on the big screen. “The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus” is all of these things... a Heath Ledger tribute, stunningly beautiful and completely and utterly bizarre.

Thousand year old story-teller and imagination guider Doctor Panassus (Christopher Plummer) is the leader of a travelling sideshow in modern times, which is extremely unsuccessful. As a result of a wager he made with the devil, Mr Nick( Tom Waits), sixteen years ago, he is in danger of losing his beautiful daughter, Valentina (Lily Cole). A new wager is set up to see who gets to keep Valentina, both Mr Nick and Doctor Panassus vie to be the first to collect five souls in the Imaginarium. With the appearance of a mysterious stranger, Tony (Heath Ledger) the competition turns out to be more than what everyone involved has bargained for. “The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus” is very slow to begin with, but speeds up in the second half to the point that it is almost going too fast. The story gains momentum and becomes intriguing in the second half, thanks to the entrance of the Imaginarium in the film. The visuals created for the Imaginarium are amazing, and are likened to a cross between the visuals in “Lord Of The Rings” and “Corpse Bride’, beautiful yet dark. Even the stage for the Imaginarium is beautiful and vintage, as are the costumes used for Doctor Panassus and his troop.

The first image of Ledger in the movie is almost spooky, like seeing an image from beyond the grave. It is an extremely different role to the ones in which Ledger was known for, although it isn’t too far removed from the Joker in “The Dark Knight” in some sequences. It is a fitting farewell to the Australian actor, and a fun and pleasant last role for fans to remember him by. The role of Doctor Panassus, as played by Plummer, is supposed to be of a role in which people feel sorry for and connect with. However, he just comes across as a drunk who doesn’t show much feeling until the very end. Perhaps the best performance in the movie is by model turned actress Lily Cole. Her portrayal of the young and naïve Valentina show both the strong and weak sides of her character. Valentina is both a temptress and a child and Cole is perfect in the role. She shows how she has made the successful transition from model to actor and has a promising acting career ahead of her. Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell’s roles are more like cameos, there in place of Ledger. Their roles are, however, not clearly defined, and are more like talking points for the audience to decode and come to their own conclusion about what they mean after the movie.

As mentioned, it is a great story and very clever. The writers did a great job of reassembling the script after the shock of having one of the major stars die. One would have to imagine what their Imaginarium would be like. However, much of the film is not thoroughly explained and can be confusing. It is not a realistic movie at all, which is inevitable of it being a fantasy film, but it can come across as extremely bizarre. This degree of strangeness will be a reason why people both love and hate the film.

7/10

The Box

The Box
Year: 2009
Director: Richard Kelly
Cast: Cameron Diaz, James Marsden, Frank Langella

In My Own Words
I was proud of myself going into this movie. I was going in to watch a film without reading a single review about it. Therefore I went in with no expectations and no clue as to whether this would be a good or bad movie. Unfortunately, I found it to be the latter, which is really a shame because the preview for it looked so good! I guess that is a credit to the people who edited the preview, they made it look like it should be good and worth watching. That’s what their job is though, to advertise the movie and buy it, just like any other product. Well, it worked! I bought a ticket for something I probably didn’t need…just like good advertising does. But, I just enjoy watching movies so it really wasn’t as bad an experience as what I am making out.

Review“The Box” is about a financially struggling couple, Norma and Arthur Lewis (Cameron Diaz and James Marsden) who wake one morning to fins a mysterious box only containing a button on their front door step. Later in the day, a mysterious stranger appears to inform them that if they hit the button, they will receive a million dollars. However, if they do this, then someone, who they don’t know, will die. From this plot summary, one would assume that “The Box” is going to be a film about the moral questions in life. The movie posters for it and its preview also add to the equation the assumption that this movie is a race against time. However, this film is none of these.

Although the question of whether or not you would push the button will be asked amongst viewers after the movie, the movie focuses very little on this question. It also lacks the suspense and other elements that would qualify it as being a thriller. The movie is completely different to what people will perceive it as being before they go in and may or may not, but in most cases, won’t be a pleasant surprise. For the first half of the movie, the audience is keep enthralled by the mysterious happenings and tries to piece the puzzle together. It is in this time that there is hope of the film coming to a pleasing finish, but it is soon vanquished by a turn that just seems ridiculous. The story does just not work as it is hard to follow in parts and completely unrealistic and far-fetched.

The direction of this film leaves much to be desired, with bad choices in editing, character and script. It is a shame to see such actors as Diaz, Marsden and Langella in a film that does not do them any favours. Diaz is unlikable and painful as Norma Lewis. In a role such as hers, the audience should feel pity for her, but instead feels nothing for her. And despite the facial abnormalities of Langella, his character is not intimidating or scary, or whatever he is supposed to be. Not a good choice of role to his follow up from “Frost/Nixon”. Their was evident character development for each of the characters which made the audience understand and acknowledge were each of them had came from, yet this was not enough to create any type of connection or empathy with them.

“The Box” certainly does not live up to the hype and many people will find watching the preview of it far more exciting than watching the movie itself.

3/10