The Tourist

The Tourist
Year: 2010
Director: Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
Cast: Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, Paul Bettany, Timothy Dalton

In My Own Words The combination of Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie is a film makers dream. Two of the biggest movie stars on the planet and two of my personal favourite actors. Johnny Depp is just likable in every role he has been in the past few years. Even in "The Libertine" where one of his first lines is "You are not going to like me". He failed at that because I still found him likable. He's not afraid to take risks, I think he is more afraid of taking on a role people might consider "normal". He has been nominated for 3 Oscars, but has yet to take home one. I would love to see him win one, but what will it take? He's been nominated for"Pirates Of The Carribean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl", "Finding Neverland" and "Sweeny Todd: The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street". All amazing roles completely out of the ordinary yet no golden statue. What does he have to do?!

Then there is Angelina. The actress who has show-stopping beauty, but is sometimes more popular for what she does off screen than on screen. Her past romances, kissing siblings and being known as a "home wrecker" in the tabloids overshadow how truly amazing she is an an actress. She has been nominated for two Academy Awards and took home the big one in 1999 for "Girl, Interrupted". I think she is brilliant, regardless of what she does in her private life. After all, what is true about her so-called private life that we read in the celebrity gossip magazines?

I've already established that Depp and Jolie are amazing actors, but do they work together? These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
Everything about "The Tourist" points towards a winning combination. It stars Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie who are two of the biggest movie stars in the world at the moment, has an Oscar winning director in Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck and it's set in a beautiful city like Venice. It seems like nothing could go wrong, or could it? "The Tourist" was always going to do well at the box office no matter what happenned in the film. It is one of those films which some people are going to love and others are going to find ridiculous. "The Tourist" is an action thriller which borders on comedy. Unfortunately, the comedy aspect makes it hard to take the film seriously when you feel like you should be taking it seriously. Frank Tupelo (Johnny Depp) is a maths teacher minding his own business on a train trip to Venice when a beautiful, mysterious English woman, Elise (Angelina Jolie) sits next to him. Little does he know, he is part of a plan of Elise's elusive love, Alexander Pearce to detour the authorities and make them think that Frank is actually him.

Set against the amazing backdrop of Venice, "The Tourist" seems to be a very confused film. It is not quite sure what it is. It could have been a serious film and it seems like that is what the film makers would have wanted, but with Johnny Depp involved it doesn't come across that way. Not to say that Johnny Depp can't do serious roles because he definately can, but his character of Frank is quite comedic. On the other hand, it is not as funny as it should be to qualify as a comedy. This confusion makes the film seem a bit messy, although it does play out perfectly and runs smoothly on the screen. Visually it is an amazing film to watch. Henckel von Donnersmarck has pieced the film together beautifully and the cinematography, editing and visuals are amazing. Scriptwise, it is a good story and completely unpredictable. Everytime you think you know what is going on, something will happen to change your thoughts. It is one of those films you will walk away from and the more you think about it, the more everything will start to make sense. However, it is the scrip that provides the comedy moments which creates the confusion of the film.

Both Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie are stars, there is no doubt about that. Johnny Depp is able to show so much emotion in just his facial expressions and in his eyes. He is able to make the audience feel great pity for him at the beginning of the film. The character of Frank feels much like the Inchabod Crane who Depp played in "Sleepy Hollow". Jolie shines on the screen, the camera just adores her. Depp and Jolie visually look good on the screen together, but there isn't a great deal of chemistry between the two. Maybe they were afraid of creating too much chemistry between the two in case that started creating rumours.

If you go into "The Tourist" thinking you will see a drama, you will be disappointed. If you think it is going to be a comedy, you will also be disappointed. If you think it is a psychological action film, you may not be so disappointed. If you think it is just going to be just a good piece of entertainment and something which is visually beautiful to watch, you will enjoy the film. Visually it is amazing and beautifully directed with beautiful people, but it is just confused about what it is and what it is trying achieve.
6/10

TRON Legacy

TRON Legacy
Year: 2010
Director: Joseph Kosinki
Cast: Jeff Bridges, Garrett Hedlund, Olivia Wilde, Michael Sheen

In My Own Words
How excited are sci-fi fans about this film? After 28 years since the original "TRON", fans finally get to see the revamped version of the old Disney classic. I never watched the original "TRON". One of the reasons being that I was born in 1982 so it wasn't a new release I got to see at the cinema. My only memory of it is of it being one of the trailers on my other Disney movie videos (yes, videos....let me know if anyone needs reminding of what a video is). At that point in time I was more interested in Disney films with talking animals rather than science fiction films. Since then, it is not a movie I have seen on DVD. I believe it is on DVD, but it is very hard to come by. I would watch it if I could find it! I am sure a few of the questions which I have about "TRON Legacy" would be answered if I had seen "TRON". Maybe I would have appreciated it more, but I'm not quite sure. Maybe I would have been comparing it too much and would have hated it! Who knows! Personally I thought the best things about the film were the music and the visuals. Without the impact of those two features, the movie would have just been a confusing and boring 2 hours. I never thought I would credit Daft Punk with making a movie worthwhile. Of course, if you are a sci fi fan, you are obviously going to disagree with me. This film could well be your bread and butter.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
28 years after Disney released "TRON" in cinemas, it's sequel "TRON Legacy" finally comes to our screens. The original "TRON" was seen as a break through in cinema as it was released at a time when computers hadn't been around for very long and a movie about someone being sucked into a computer system created a great deal of interest. However, 28 years later in 2010, it doesn't create quite the same interest in our worlds where the internet is a necessity to many. The story is out dated and dull, only to be saved by the impressive visuals and soundtrack. Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund) is the son of Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges), the video game creator who has been missing for years. When Sam investigates in his father's abandoned video game arcade, he finds himself sucked into the digital world which his father created. However, the world is now ruled by Flynn's creation gone bad, Clu ( also played by Jeff Bridges). Sam soon finds that he is the enemy of Clu and that his father is alive and living in exile inside the Grid.

It just seems as though Disney left it way too long to release "TRON Legacy" in order for it to be a success. Disney only confirmed 2 years ago in 2008 that their were serious aboit releasing a "TRON" sequel. Leaving it this long meant that times have changed as have what people find intriguing. We have seen many movies which are set around or in computer generated worlds that in the age of computers where anything is possible, it is hard to impress. Also, there will be many people who haven't seen the original "TRON" as it was released nearly 30 years ago.The film will pose many questions for those who haven't seen the original "TRON". For a film that is hard to come by these days on DVD, this was always going to be a problem. One can guess themselves what happenned in the first film, but there is still a great deal of film concepts that would become so much clearer for the audience if they had seen the first. Unlike many other sequels, this film is easier to be judged as a stand alone film rather than a sequel. This may not do the film any justice, which is a rarity for sequels.

On the other hand, visually "TRON Legacy" has perfect timing. The film was not made for 3D, but post-production made it possible. The computer generated images during the film, such as the games of survival are truly amazing and exciting to watch. The techniques used to make Jeff Bridges 30 years younger are absolutely intriguing. It is amazing what can be done during post production of films these days. The costumes and make up are also very impressive. The soundtrack to the film, as done by Daft Punk, is one of the key elements of the film. Even for people who are not fans of the electronic scene, there is no denying that the music adds to the effectiveness of the film. Each piece of music enhances the scene which it is in and brings it to life. The direction and post-production of this film is really quite commendable.

The acting in this film is quite simple. The only two actors who show any type of emotion are Jeff Bridges and Garret Hedlund in the reunion scene and goodbye scene. Otherwise their acting is quite bland. Olivia Wilde as Kevin Flynn's sidekick, Quorra doesn't do anything spectacular in this film and it is not a very hard role for her to play. As Zeus, Michael Sheen seems to be channelling his inner David Bowie, and does so successfully. He is un-nerving and bizarre, but strangely interesting. The film is actually quite well choreographed during scenes such as with the sirens supplying Sam with his disk.

"TRON Legacy" is a hard one. The story and script is outdated and the acting is not spectacular, as one would'nt expect from a film such as this. However, it takes full advantage of the CGI which is available today and the film strives on this throughout the film. Without the CGI, there wouldn't be much of a film. Sci-fi fans will love this film, while others will either take it or leave it. The CGI can only take you part of the way to a good film, a good story and script will take you the rest of the way. Which makes "TRON Legacy" only partly a good film.
5.5/10

Due Date

Due Date
Year: 2010
Director: Todd Phillips
Cast: Robert Downey Jr, Zach Galifianakis, Michelle Monaghan, Jamie Foxx, Juliette Lewis

In My Own Words
I'm a prude. I can't help it. I will go to some films and get completely grossed out by some things. But...being a movie critic, I need to suck it up princess. I need to see past all the crude jokes I see in some films and review it as a whole. I mean, if you're a critic and review a film based on your personal interests and tastes only, you're going to be a pretty lousy critic. You're only going to connect with those who are exactly like you and let's face it, nobody is exactly like you so the only person you are connecting with is yourself. Of course you should always be true to yourself and not do and say things just to please other people, but you have got to judge a film for the whole package which it is. "Due Date" is one of those films which has scenes which made me squirm in my seat and just turn anyway. I won't say too much because it will be a spoiler...but for those who have seen it, the dog's scene in the car when they are trying to sleep. But whatever turns you on, really. I think perhaps the film that personally grossed me out the most was "Van Wilder: Party Liasion" and the scene that grossed me out the most in that film also involved a god. What is it about animals that makes film makers want to make gross scenes about them? Again, this is just me. There are millions of people out there who have different taste than me. So I won't talk again about this issue in my review. Thats what "In My Own Words" is for.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
"Due Date" has been hailed as the new "The Hangover". It does share many similarities...Todd Phillips is once again the director, it's about a male bonding experience and Zach Galifianakis once again appears as the "strange" guy. Yes, there is definately similarities, but it is not the next "The Hangover". Peter Highman (Robert Downey Jr.) is on his way back from Atlanta to Los Angeles to be there for the birth of his first child. Unfortunately, due to a number of unfortunate events, all due to aspiring actor Ethan Tremblay ( Zach Galifianakis), he gets denied boarding on his flight, losing his wallet and having to find his own way across the country back to his wife, Sarah (Michelle Monaghan). With a travelling partner like Ethan, this is going to be no easy journey.

Being as "Due Date" does have so many similarities to "The Hangover", one may be forgiven for believing that this is the sequel. It also takes in elements from Todd Phillips other films such as "Old School" and "Road Trip". Therefore, the making of this film would have almost been a walk in the park for Phillips', it's not like it is something he hasn't done before. So all up, he does direct the film well. He certainly knows what he is doing when it comes to editing, camer angle choices and casting for this film. Even though "Due Date" isn't as funny as his last film, it would be unfair to say that the film isn't funny at all. There is some clever dialogue and clever verbal jokes, although they are not the most original jokes. For example, one can always see where a tin of someone's ashes in a comedy is going. The humour won't be to everyone's liking, but if you have enjoyed Phillips' in the past you will enjoy this film. The direction where the film is going is also very predictable, no guessing is really needed for the end. As they say though, it's the journey that matters, not the destination.

Zach Galifianakis plays exactly the same role as he played of Alan in "The Hangover", there is just more of him. Some of his antics are quite funny, but others are again just predictable and after time can just get quite annoying. There is no doubt that Galifianakis can play other roles as we did see him do in "Up In The Air", this just seems to be familiar and safe territory for him. He doesn't do the role badly at all, and he serves his purpose as the painful travel partner well. On the other hand, Robert Downey Jr. is great and so likable in this role. He plays the role of Peter with so much ease and is completely natural and believable. It is so easy to forget that he is acting and he keeps the film grounded. To Phillips' credit, he did definately pick the two perfect people for the lead roles for this film.

"Due Date" is predictable and not the funniest film you will see this year, but it does it's job. It gives the audience a few laughs and keeps them entertained. Perhaps next time Todd Phillips will step outside his comfort zone and bring something different to the table. With "The Hangover Part II" in production as we speak, we can't expect anything different from him for awhile. Can he make any films other than those male bonding road trip films which he is so good at at this point in his career? We are yet to see.
6/10

Megamind

Megamind
Year: 2010
Director: Tom McGrath
Cast: Will Ferrell, Brad Pitt, Tina Fey, Jonah Hill

In My Own Words
Animation seems to be going in a new direction as of late, hasn't it? There seems to be a lack of the cute and cuddley talking animals which we used to see in the animated films in the last few decades. Now it seems to be the bad guys who are the lead characters in these films who become the heroes and they are anything but cute and cuddley. Just look at Megamind, blue with a massive forehead, hardly what would seem a promoters dream. Cute characters are so much easier to make promotional toys for Happy Meals of and have more staying power. Will we remember these characters in 20 years time which we are seeing now in the same way we remember Little Foot, Simba or the Disney princesses? They're doing their job for the film makers at the moment though, so does it really matter whether we remember them in 20 years just as long as we remember them now? Not cute and cuddley, but the movies around the characters are still great fun and good entertainment!

Anybody know what the toys are in the McDonalds Happy Meals now? I suddenly have an urge to start collecting those awesome toys again.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
It is a scenario which we see in numerous films, the underdog falls in love with the beautiful woman, proves himself as the hero but it doesn't matter because she falls in love with who he is underneath. We have seen this a lot, but not so much in animated films. It is not often we see the ugly animated character get the gorgeous girl, but you do in "Megamind"! The film does fit into the animation trend as of late of the bad guy becoming the good guy, but gives it the twist with this unsung hero getting the girl, which will do good things for peoples self esteem. Even if you are blue with a massive forehead and alien looking you can still get the one you love by being yourself! Megamind (voiced by Will Ferrell) has never been good at anything besides being bad. The means of his existence is to fight with Metro Man (Brad Pitt), but when he actually defeats Metro Man, he is completely confused by his new found dominance and lost for what to do next. He decides to create a new super hero for the town, Titan (Jonah Hill) so he will have someone to fight. One thing he didn't count on was failing in love with Titan's crush, news reporter Roxanne Ritchie (Tina Fey) and bringing out more bad in Titan than Megamind ever had.

"Megamind" is a great, fun family film to watch. It is not just a film for children as their are many themes there for adults as well, such as the romance theme which children will of course be unable to relate to. The graphics are amazing in the film and it is one film which is worth seeing in 3D while it is in the cinemas. It is well written and has a lot of great laughs throughout. However, the ending won't be a surprise to anyone and will be something most people will see coming from the very beginning.

"Megamind" has some big names which have contributed their vocal talents to the film. The one thing that is obvious with this is that with each of the cast members, they do not seem to go the extra mile with their characters voices. Each of them, bar perhaps Will Ferrell , plays the type of character they would normally play in a film which they would physically appear in and it is easy to pick who's voice is which. For example, Brad Pitt plays the good looking hero, Tina Fey plays the businesswoman who has too little time for her personal life and Jonah Hill plays the overweight nerd who can't be taken seriouslyh. Will Ferrell does definately do a good job at providing the voice of Megamind and, unlike the others, you can often forget that it is Ferrell's voice you are hearing.

If you are taking your children to see "Megamind", you will probably find that it is more a boys movie than a girls movie. Children aside, it is a film that all ages will enjoy. The graphics are great to watch and the script is witty and funny. Overall, besides the romance, it isn't the most original film to come out in the last few years and it is quite predictable, but definately good for a laugh.
7/10

The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader

The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader
Year: 2010
Director: Michael Apted
Cast: Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, Ben Barnes, Gary Sweet

In My Own Words
Personally, I think this series of The Chronicles of Narnia has worn itself out. I'm not going to harp on about how "The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe" is the core of the chronicles and definately the most popular of the books.2008's "Prince Caspian" was definately anything but a flop and although not as successful as "The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe", still highly acclaimed and very entertaining. However, with "The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader", the series just seems worn out and tired. The magic of Narnia doesn't hold up in the third film. Maybe it is because Peter and Susan aren't part of this journey, or maybe because the creatures in this film aren't quite as cute and fluffy as in the other films. When does a series of film wear out? Obviously, other book series have been made into films and have caught the public's attention from the first to the last book such as Lord Of The Rings and Harry Potter. Maybe it does come back to the fact that with The Chronicles of Narnia, "The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe" is far more popular and wider read than the other books. Have "Prince Caspian" and "The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader" just been sequels to the first film? I doubt that I would be asking this question and I would'nt have thought that the series has tired out if I actually enjoyed the film more.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
"The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader" is the third film in the latest adaptation of C.S. Lewis' novels. It is third in sequence and third in order of worthy acclaim. This film seems confused, it doesn't know whether it is a movie for adults and children alike, or a childrens film. Some of it can seem like a film for everyone, but it can seem extremely simple and a little too light. Almost like it is was made especially for children under 10. If it was made to be a film primarily for young children, this would be fine and it would be critiqued as a childrens film, but it is not so will be critiqued as a film for families and singles alike. .....which is unfortunate for the film makers. "The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader" sees Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund Pevensie (Skandar Keynes) return to Narnia with their cousin, Eustace (Will Poulter). They once again meet up with Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) as they try to defeat the new evil in Narnia.

"The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader" is a beautiful film visually to watch. The visual effects are very impressive and the fantasy segments are highly realistic. The special effects are perhaps the best thing about the film. However, while watching the film you cannot help but think that you are watching a cross between "Lord Of The Rings" and "Pirates Of The Caribbean". As impressive as the visuals are, it feels as if it has been seen before. The Narnia chronicles, with this film, just seem to have outdone they stay this time around. It doesn't feel suspenseful at all and can seem to drag throughout the film. The simplicity of the film seems out of place at this stage of the series. Yes, it is based on the book and the film makers are staying true to the book so they can't be blamed too much, but with the right script, editing and acting, this could have been avoided.

Simply, the acting isn't to write home about in this film. Ben Barnes does not give a bad performance in his second film as the courageous Prince Caspian. It is not an Oscar winning performance, but brings all the can be bought into the role as a fantasy prince. Skandar Keynes is also not altogether bad as Edmund and is probably the best out of the younger actors in his role. Georgie Henley's performance seems forced and completely lacks emotion. In the earlier Narnia films, she was adorable as youngest Lucy, but it seems as if it may have been her childish cutesiness which made her successful in the role previously. Henley is in that awkward stage of being between the child and adult actor and it is actually painful to watch. Will Poulter's Eustace is supposed to seem completely painful, but his performance is one which you would expect to see on stage in school theatre. It is harsh, but his acting in the film is completely amatuer and more stage acting than film acting. Of course, this cannot just be blamed on the actors, but also on Michael Apted's direction. It is so obvious that there was a change of director from the first two films to this film and Apted is definately not a bad director, but maybe he is just not accustomed to how he should be directing younger actors in a fantasy film. However, its not a talent which one would normally have.

It is hard for a film which is part of a series of films to be reviewed as a stand alone film. It is harder to do so when as a stand alone film it fails more than as a film in a series. "The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader" seems like a mess on screen and would definately not be successful if it weren't part of "The Chronicles Of Narnia". As it is part of the chronicles, it will still be successful at the box office as no one can resist the charms of C.S. Lewis.
5.5/10

Harry Potter and The Deathy Hallows: Part 1

Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 1
Year: 2010
Director: David Yates
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Helena Bonham Carter

In My Own Words
I am an unashamed Harry Potter fan, not afraid to say it. I won't say I was always a Harry Potter fan, but I became so with the release of "Harry Potter and The Prisoner Of Azkaban" in cinemas back in 2004. After deciding that I wouldn't mind seeing the film, I went and watched the first 2 movies and was hooked. Since then, I've read every one of the Harry Potter books, seen all the films the day or day after it came out and stood in lines at bookstores on the day the books were released. What do I love the most about Harry Potter? It's a story about growing up and life as a high school student with a difference. Even though it is a fantasy story, people can identify with Harry, Ron and Hermione. They are outcasts in a world of outcasts and struggle with growing up issues, but then they are great fun to watch and by now you know them as well as you would your best friends.

How do I feel about the last chapter of the Harry Potter saga? It didn't feel like it at all. Personally I don't think it was a great idea to split the last book up into two movies, but I can see why they did it. I know I first thought that they split the last book into two to keep the franchise going and keep the money rolling in, but now I see that it would have been a 4 hour movie if they made the last book into one film. I still don't know if it worked though. Of course I have an advantage over the people who haven't read the books, but I don't think it ended in the right place. Yet I don't know if there would've been the right place to finish part one. Hurry up part two! In saying this, I would really be interested in hearing from people who haven't read the books to see whether they think that the ending was sufficient. It is hard for me to say knowing what is coming next.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
So, the last chapter of the Harry Potter saga. But wait....there is still more! Whatever the reason for making "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows" into two movies, it definately doesn't feel like it ends in the right place. Not intense enough to be a cliff hanger, just needed to end maybe 15 minutes earlier. However, it is definately not the worst of the Harry Potter movies and nowhere near the worst movies of the year if you look at it as a stand alone film. A word of warning though, if you are going to the film to see it as a stand alone film as you haven't seen the first six movies, then you won't have a clue what is going on. After the death of Hogwarts head master,Albus Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) at the end of the last Harry Potter film, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) set off to begin their end battle with Harry's life-long enemy, Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes). They take hiding in the woods of England to destroy Voldemort's horcruxes (a term which only those who have been following Harry's journey will know) before Voldemort finds them and destroy's them first.

The second last installment of the Harry Potter series is very close to being, if it isn't, the darkest of the films. There are not many smiles to be had by any of the characters and this is the way it was always going to be in this movie. The movie stays true to the book which it is based on and some things work better on screen than they do in words. There are segments in the book which are extremely tense and the intensity of Harry's situation is transferred to the audience very well. The audience feels the danger and fears for their safety. It does tend to drag on a bit at one point in time, but in these scenes it still manages to show how the journey is taking it's toll on the three friends and again, it is still true to the book in doing so. The cinematography and visuals have definately progressed with the films over time and several scenes are really quite beautiful. The musical score is also perfect for the film and again brings more emotion into the film. The ending is somwhat questionable though, as it is not a cliff hanger by any means. This film didn't need a cliff hanger at the end of it to increase interest and encourage people to go and watch the final film though so it can be forgiven.

"Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows" is the Harry Potter film which shows the true acting ability of Radcliffe, Grint and Watson. They have all matured in their acting so much in the past few years and this film is very well acted. The three of them just bounce of one another in their acting and create such a strong relationship not just between themselves, but also between themselves and the audience. Radcliffe, Grint and Watson all give strong performances and you can really tell that their acting is not as forced as what it felt back in their earlier days. There shouldn't be a doubt in anyone's mind now that these three will all have careers after Harry Potter, and good careers at that. Helena Bonham Carter is also great to watch as the evil and clearly insane Bellatrix Lestrange.

Whether or not "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1" was a great film or not or whether it had a cliff hanger ending or not, won't take Harry Potter fans away from enjoying this film or looking forward to the finale. Not the worst Harry Potter film, not the best Harry Potter film. It is no longer a children's tale and it is very dark. Nevertheless, it is still Harry Potter and it definately shows how the film saga has become better production wise over the years. Let's hear it Harry Potter fans....bring on July 2011.
7/10

The American

The American
Year: 2010
Director: Anton Corbijn
Cast: George Clooney, Paolo Bonacelli, Violante Placido

In My Own Words
I can truly believe that "The American" would not be everybody's type of film. It is a very interesting film, if not very confusing. It doesn't tell you much. There is so many questions which remain afterwards. It is funny, a movie can be criticised for leaving too many stones unturned, but then you get a film where barely anything is revealed and it can be considered a masterpiece. I'm not saying that "The American" is a masterpiece, but there are so many films which don't tell the story and are considered amazing. I suppose it all comes down to whether it makes you uneasy not knowing exactly what is going on or not. I don't know exactly what I am to tell you the truth. Some films I don't mind not having a back story and some I do. I'm actually thinking that I prefer to know the whole story. I love getting to know all different types of people so naturally I like knowing the characters like they are people I have just met in reality! Yet, mystery in people can be completely intriguing, as is the case with movies.

I have been asked after watching this film "What is the movie about?" I can answer it in one sentanceand very vaguely, but that is about as far as I can get. For this reason, I am completely intrigued, as should be everyone else who see's this film.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
Many people may be surprised by the type of movie which "The American" is. With the star being George Clooney and being shown in the main stream cinema multiplexes across Australia, one would expect the film to be quite commercial. However, it is anything but. "The American" is a piece of art in the traditional sense. It is stunning to watch, but carries a sense of mystery and questions which are begging to be answered. It is the marriage of the Italian film and the American film, something that hasn't been seen in quite awhile. Jack (George Clooney) is the American who is in hiding in a small Italian village after a project in Sweden ends disastreously. When hiding out in this small town, Jack decides that he wants to leave this part of his life behind and start anew after one last project. Jack starts to slip into his new life by befriending the local priest and forming a relationship with Clara (Violante Placido), before he leaves his old life behind.

So many questions are left unanswered in this film, which can make it unsettling to watch and many people will find just too strange to feel right to enjoy. It is, however, quite the piece of art. Director Anton Corbijn constructs every scene with the utmost care and no scene is not left aesthetically perfect. Every scene is compelling and beautiful and you can often get lost in the visual beauty enough to forget what is actually happenning story-wise. The cinematography and editing is superb. The beauty of Italy is perfectly caputred, while the camera also captures every tiny bit of emotion displayed on each of the main players faces. As previously said, the story itself can be a tad uneasy for some as it does not present itself simply. It is a simple storyline which is made complex by a verbally restricted script and is told more by the visuals and camera angles. For some this may be challenging and unsettling and others it may be challenging and fascinating.

The acting in "The American" is extremely subtle, yet effective. Although it may seem like George Clooney is hardly acting, it is actually one of the hardest roles he will ever have to undertake. He doesn't have any long speeches to express how his character feels so he has to express everything in his facial expressions. It is a hard job to try to keep a neutral expression while still trying to tell something with your face. Clooney achieves this in his role and shows his brilliance in his profession by being able to do this.

If you like everything presented to you simply in a movie and you don't like to be too mentally stimulated, then "The American" isn't for you. It is not often that a film comes along which can be as mentally stimulating as thes, yet doesn't have much to say out loud.
8/10

Let Me In

Year: 2010
Director: Matt Reeves
Cast: Kodi Smite-McPhee, Chloe Moretz, Richard Jenkins

In My Own Words
I often wondered (until about 2 days ago) why American studios decideto adapt foreign films not too long after they are released in their home countries. It used to make me slightly angry why they did, it was like I thought they couldn't come up with ideas of their own so they had to "steal" ideas from other countries. Now I realise that I was being really unfair by thinking this. Now I see that foreign films are remade as a means of exposing the story to a greater audience. Many people do not take pleasure in watching foreign films as they are too far removed from what they know, and they also involve a fair bit of reading of subtitles unless you know the language. So making the film into an English speaking film exposes the story to a greater audience. And if it is a great story, why shouldn't it be exposed to an audience? It would be selfish to let language barriers get in the way of great storytelling! Especially when it is a story like "Let The Right One In", the Swedish film which "Let Me In" is based on. I must admit, I was extremely weary going into this film, as I normally am when seeing a remade film, or watching a vampire film. However, it has cometo my attention as of late that a remade film doesn't mean a bad film, especially those that are remade from a foreign film. Just look at "The Departed"!

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
The thought of another vampire movie may bring on a cringe for some people. With so many vampires going around in movies and on television, one can be forgiven for thinking that "Let Me In" is just another one of those films that has come along with the fad. It isn't. It is far darker and more disturbing than any other vampire phenomenon you have seen in a long. long time. Like it's mother movie, "Let The Right One In", it evokes a number of emotions which are strange to see together in a film. There is tenderness and innocence, as well as fear and horror. Young Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is an outsider at school, badly bullied and is in the middle of his parents divorce. He is without a friend in the world, until he meet a mysterious little girl by the name of Abby ( Chloe Moretz) in his courtyard of his apartment block. He develops a strong friendship and falls for her in the way only a 12 year old can. He finds out in the worst way possible that Abby is a vampire and that everything is far more complicated than it should be for 12 year old best friends.

"Let Me In" is dark, but somewhat beautiful. It stays true to the film which it is remade from, but it is set in New Mexico rather than in Sweden. There is nothing corny about this vampire film, and it represents what vampires should represent, fear in the heart of those who meet them. It is extremely unsettling at times and very intense and suspenseful. However, there is a feeling of sympathy for both Owen and Abby. The film focuses of human emotion and the troubles of a child growing up being bullied and in a troubled family. There is a real sadness to the film, as well as real terror. It wouldn't be a vampire film or a main stream remake without having more blood than it did in the original and therefore leading to some cringe-worthy moments. The "scary" scenes are definately not subtle. "Let Me In" is very dark and not for the faint hearted, it is everything a traditional vampire movie should be.

Kodi Smit-McPhee and Chloe Moretz are perfectly cast for the lead roles. Smit-McPhee is wonderful in this film. He shows so much emotion and his performance will ring true to many parents who are watching their children going through the same things he is going through. He really has a bright future ahead of him. Moretz is no stranger to horror movies or to playing roles of the young girl who is beyond her years. She is not the traditional vampire girl, but that only makes her more suited to the role. She is very good in her role as she is cute and sweet, but also an absolute horror.

"Let Me In" takes the vampire movie back to where it belongs. When vampires were beings that were capable of violent killings and would kill without rhyme of reason and there is no corniness to be seen. There is always something troubling about children in horror films, and this movie is no different. Yet, there is still something very sweet about the friendship between Owen and Abby and that is what makes "Let Me In" work. The combination of childhood love and the presence of pure terror.
8/10

The Town

Year: 2010
Director: Ben Affleck
Cast: Ben Affleck, Jeremy Renner, Rebecca Hall, Blake Lively, Chris Cooper, John Hamm

In My Own Words
I am proud of Ben Affleck. It's like he was taken seriously when he and pal Matt Damon won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay for "Good Will Hunting" back in 1997, then had a period for awhile where critics could not see him in a serious light with films like "Daredevil" and "Surviving Christmas", but his last few major projects have shown just how far Affleck has come. He has given some of the best performances of his career in films such as "Hollywoodland" (which is actually one of my personal favourite films) and "State Of Play", and had an extremely successful full length directorial debut in the 2007 film, "Gone Baby Gone". In "The Town", he shows his true talent as a director and an actor. It is great to look at someone like Ben Affleck and see true potential being reached. Being an Affleck fan for a long time, I left the cinema bursting with pride for him. Nothing like a film to prove what you knew all along!

I have often spoken about how films can be a great tourism tool, but this film actually got me thinking about how they can sometimes not be such great tourism tools. Boston is a beautiful city, and I know I'm not the only one who thinks this. "The Town" does actually show some of the beauty of Boston, but it shows the bad side of the city as well. It represents Boston in a dangerous light showing the crime and poverty. There is nothing wrong with what Affleck has done here, as he is madly in love with Boston and I am sure he would love people to visit it, but there are people who haven't been to Boston and know nothing of it besides what they see in the film. These people probably wouldn't want to visit Boston after seeing this film. Shame if they are going to base their opinion of all of Boston on a film that focuses only on Charlestown, which is only one part of Boston.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review"The Town" is one of those truly unpredictable films. There is nothing worse than sitting through a movie with a clear idea of where it is heading and how it will end. With its unpredictability, fine acting and brilliant cinematography, Ben Affleck proves himself as a successful director, if there was any doubt before. Doug MacRay (Affleck) is living in a world plagued with crime and theft which he is trying to escape, but keeps finding himself drawn back into the lifestyle of Charlestown that he and is friends have grown up in. When they rob a Boston bank and take hostage the bank's manager, Claire (Rebecca Hall), Doug feels that he should follow Claire to make sure she doesn't do or say anything that will get them caught out. However, the two start falling for each other, which means that Doug must do all he can to keep who he really is hidden. Being from Charlestown, escaping who the world he has grown up in impacts every aspect of his past, present and more than likely his future.

"The Town" is extremely well done. The story is well written and is perfectly adapted for the screen. It is extremely clever and interesting from the beginning to the end. Although it can be slow in parts, every scene is meaningful and is there for a reason. The cinematography is definately a stand out. It is extremely impressive and often beautiful, as well as being completely appropriate for each instance. "The Town" is very well pieced together with the range of camera shots, sound and locations that help explore the emotion and reality of the film.

Perhaps one of the strongest points of "The Town" is its character development and it's cast. By the middle of the film, it is as though the audience knows each of the main characters personally and is able to empathize which each one of them. Affleck gives a stellar performance as Doug. The audience feels each of his emotions that he passes through and see's that he is desperate to escape the way of life in Charlestown. At times he does come across as perhaps too nice of a guy that you have to wonder how such a nice guy can even contemplate being involved in the type of activities he is.It is as though he doesn't have a reason to commit theft, he just does it for the sake of it. However, this is the way Affleck shows how Charlestown can make people do things that they wouldn't be exposed to anywhere else. Jeremy Renner is perfect as Doug's partner in crime and long time friend, Jem. He has the right amount of aggressiveness and intensity to make the audience believe that a person like this could really do the unspeakable. Rebecca Hall also gives a great performance and perhaps the best performance of her career to date. She is extremely likable and can light up the room with her smile, yet when she is upset or angry, it ignites fear. Blake Lively does well as Doug's ex love interest, Krista, although she does not come across as quite as trashy as the film makes her out to be.

"The Town" is complete success and it brings out the best in everyone involved. The acting is superb, story thrilling and direction a tribute to Affleck. He has really shown what he is capable of with both his direction and acting in this film. Well done.
8.5/10

Eat Pray Love

Eat Pray Love
Year: 2010
Director: Ryan Murphy
Cast: Julia Roberts, Javier Bardem, Viola Davis, Richard Jenkins, James Franco

In My Own Words
The worst thing about living in Australia is that you hear the whispers come from overseas about films which have yet to be released here. So when I started to hear that “Eat Pray Love” was getting bad reviews, it wasn’t a massive surprise to me. I read “Eat Pray Love” in the middle of last year and I loved it. I love Elizabeth Gilbert’s tale of self discovery while travelling over the world. Some people severely dislike the book or find it really hard to get into. I think I loved it so much because I went through a stage of selfishness where I jet-setted to the other side of the world to do something for myself after giving too much of myself to someone else. However, my journey took me to LA, not to Italy, India and Indonesia. LA was the right place for me to go and find myself though so I’m not complaining! Being big on travel as well, I loved hearing about the three countries that Gilbert visited. Italy, India and Indonesia are three countries I am dying to go to, even though I have been to Bali before. Again, films act as a great tourist tool. I stand by this fact because people love going places and identifying with it because of a movie. And there is no better way to get excited about going somewhere than to watch movies about it.

Anyway, before I went into “Eat Pray Love”, I knew what to expect of it and why it wouldn’t be everyone’s cup of tea. “Eat Pray Love” is a selfish memoir. It is all “me, me, me” for Gilbert. It doesn’t bother me, but I could see how it would other people. And memoirs are great storytelling for books, but they are not always well interpreted on the big screen. I knew “Eat Pray Love” would be one of those memoirs that wouldn’t be. There is no real beginning, middle or end and no major conflict where the story takes a turning point. Gilbert’s book is really a collection of thoughts, which can only be thought, not seen. It may seem like a great idea for a film, but it should have just been left as is. It’s a good book, let’s not destroy it.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“Eat Pray Love” by Elizabeth Gilbert could well be known as the most successful girls book to be released in the past 10 years, the movie is very far from the best chick flick to be released in the past 10 years. It is purely a case of the book should have been left alone and not meddled. There are some good points about the movie, but it isn’t a story. The book isn’t even a story, it is a collection of Gilbert’s travels and thoughts about her life and her past few years. There is no suspense in the book at all as it is not that type of story. Therefore, putting it on the big screen was never going to work and was always going to leave a sour taste in audiences and critics mouths who were going to see it. Liz Gilbert (Julia Roberts) has decided for the first time in her life to devote her life to herself rather than her ex husband or current boyfriend. She has decided to go on a journey of self-discovery by spending 4 months in Italy, 4 months in India and 4 months in Indonesia. Along the way she meets lots of people who make a difference in her life and make her see the world differently.

The production of “Eat Pray Love” has good intentions behind it. It is bringing Gilbert’s book to the big screen in order to send out a message to women out there, who may not read the book that sometimes you do need to be selfish and let yourself go in order to be at peace with yourself. It is a good message to be sending out, but it gets entangled in this film that falls short of the bar which its enormous amount of promotion has set. The movie just comes across as an enormous amount of selfishness set up against some amazing landscapes. The best thing about the film is definitely the presentation of Italy, India and Bali. These three countries are sure to attract many tourists because of the beautiful way in which this film was shot. The camera techniques chosen are amazing, and Julia Roberts is a wallflower compared to the scenery. For the life changing experiences that Gilbert goes through, there isn’t as much emotion as what you would expect. There is no feeling to the beginning or any part through it. It’s all nice is the only word to describe it. The majority of the film is just bland. It is also not a short film as there is so much to cover. Two and a half hours of this film may be way too long for some people.

Julia Roberts is not bad in this film. She does give her role as Gilbert everything she’s got and performs to the best of her ability role the role she played. It is certainly no “Erin Brokovich”, but she does well in a bland film. Richard Jenkins also does well in his role as Richard from Texas. His character perhaps has the most amount of character out of any in the film. On a side note, it is interesting that Tuva Novotny, who is a Swedish born actress, can manage to play Swedish girl, Sofi and speak with an American accent. Something has gone wrong there.

It is sad to see a film which is hyped up so much fall short of everyone’s expectations. What is even more depressing is that the book shouldn’t have been made into a movie at all and should not have been subject to the back lashing it has received just by existing. It should have been left as a type of self-help book for girls and the peace would not have been disturbed. On the other hand, it will always be a good movie to watch if anyone is planning on eating gelato in Italy, meditating in India or just chilling out in Bali.
5/10

Despicable Me

Despicable Me
Year: 2010
Director: Pierre Coffin and Chris Renaud
Cast: Steve Carell, Russell Brand, Kristen Wiig, Julie Andrews, Jason Segel

In My Own Words
After the hard week I had had, this movie was exactly the medicine I needed. There is something completely uplifting about animation. I know that not all animation is uplifting, but the animation aimed at the younger audience which is also made so that older audiences can enjoy it. Rest assure, if I have had a hard day at work, you will normally find me at home afterwards watching a movie like “Lilo and Stitch” or “The Princess And The Frog”. Movies like this will also bring a smile to my face. When you are suffering from the stress of the grown up world, what’s better to escape than being entertained by the purity in G rated animation films?

The great thing about “Despicable Me” is that before you see the film, you can look at the poster and you have no idea what the movie is about. The promo’s give away nothing about the film which is a great marketing technique. It increases the public’s curiosity of the movie and therefore increases the audience! The most curious part for me before I saw the film was that this film was super successful....and it was an animation purely about a villain! Animation is known for bringing us cute and cuddly characters who overcome the ugly villains, not being purely about an ugly villain! How could something so unattractive be the star of a hit movie? The same thing was thought about “Up” when it was released last year, how could an animated film about an old man and an overweight kid look attractive on the big screen? “Up” was a huge success, and so is “Despicable Me”. There is a lot more cuteness in this film than would be expected. One of the best parts about seeing this film, was when my partner was the only one left laughing in the cinema after everyone had finished laughing at a particular part, because he just couldn’t stop. Priceless.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
There is nothing despicable about “Despicable Me”. It is one of the funniest animated films to be released in years. Not only is it very funny, but it also extremely clever, original and well written. There are not many film makers who have been brave enough to make an animated film where the lead character is a villain, and an ugly villain at that. However, directors Pierre Coffin and Chris Renaud have done a fine job at turning an ugly character that would usually be disliked into a star. Once best villain in the world, Gru (Steve Carell) knows he is losing his touch after a new villain, Vector (Jason Segel) steals the Egyptian pyramids. Challenged, Gru decides that he is going to aim higher and steal the moon. Of course, a villain must overcome several obstacles in order to get what he really wants. And as one may expect, he is in danger of becoming a good guy in the process.

Apart from being just a tad predictable, “Despicable Me” is very well written. The jokes are very clever, but just simple and easy at the same time. The story is also very creative and played out in an interesting way. There is never a dull moment throughout the film and this is one of the few animated films which has been released in 3D and it has been able to enhance the entertainment value. It is definitely worth seeing “Despicable Me” in 3D as the film makers give the audience plenty of surprises and it just adds to the fun of the film. The graphics are fantastic. It is not an overly emotional film, but there are some moments in which will pull at your emotional strings. Even though there are not any cute and cuddly fuzzy creatures such as talking dogs or cats, there are some hilarious characters such a Gru’s yellow minion friends which are definitely worth talking about after the film.

It is often hard to critique an actor for a voice part, but credit must definitely be given to the players in this film. Steve Carell, Russell Brand and Kristen Wiig are excellent in their parts. The best part about these actors taking part in “Despicable Me” is that they are not merely just lending their voice, but they are making the characters real. If one did not know which actor was which character, they would have a very hard time figuring out who was who, or they wouldn’t even be able to guess that that actor even had a part in the film. Even Jack McGrayer of “30 Rock” fame has a small part in the film, but it is incredibly hard to pick who he is.

“Despicable Me” is the must see animation of the year. It brings a smile to your face and it is incredibly hard not to find this film funny. Great talent went into making every part of this film and it is an absolute winner.
9/10

Easy A

Easy A
Year: 2010
Director: Will Gluck
Cast: Emma Stone, Penn Badgley, Amanda Bynes, Stanley Tucci, Patricia Clarkson, Alyson Michalka, Malcolm McDowall, Lisa Kudrow, Thomas Haden Church

In My Own Words
Some of the things I hate when I am in a movie cinemas-
1. People texting during a film in a cinema
2. People commentating the film in a cinema
3. People talking about something else during the film in a cinemas and then asking their friends what is happening in the film
4. People talking on their phone during a film and then giving you a dirty look when you say something about it!

Obviously this was my experience while watching “Easy A”. I don’t understand why people do these things in the movies. If you were going to talk to your friends the whole way through or look at your phone, then why purchase a $10 movie ticket when you could just do that at home for free? Maybe I get too fired up about it...but one more thing I don’t get. I saw the new Harry Potter trailer today (something I am VERY excited about and went home to watch “Harry Potter and The Prisoner Of Azkaban to celebrate seeing the trailer!) and the group of teenage boys and girls killed themselves laughing whenever any emotion was shown in the trailer and when the sentence “The Motion Picture Event Of A Generation”. This also happened when I saw “Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban” at the cinemas when it first came out. A group of teenagers killed themselves laughing when Harry cried. Is it really that cool to laugh at Harry Potter? Is it taboo for some teenagers to like Harry Potter and will they really be social outcasts if they do? I actually know plenty of teenagers who like Harry Potter and plenty of adults as well. I am probably over-analysing.

I suppose this is just what you are going to experience when you go to see a “teen flick” like “Easy A”. I am getting cynical in my old age. Or has anyone else noticed this?

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“Easy A” is just a load of fun. One would think that with a subject matter such as this, a film would be crude and dirty. However, there is an evident lack of obscenity in this film that makes it a film that a wider audience can enjoy, rather than just the hormonal teenage crowd. The quick witted humour, well written script and the leading lady make this film a breath of fresh air and a pleasure to watch. Olive (Emma Stone) was to invisible to ever have any type of reputation until the day that she makes up a tale to get her out of spending the weekend with her best friend, Rhiannon’s (Alyson Michalka) crazy parents. Before she knows it, the school’s rumour mill is in over drive and Olive is the subject. Rather than publicly deny the rumours, Olive decide to use her promiscuous reputation for good by making people believe that she has slept with the school’s bullied to ironically better their reputation. Before she knows it, she is in too deep and she has no idea how to climb back out.

It is the simple but smart humour which makes “Easy A” a winner. It is a stereotypic al teen movie which, like a good genre film should do, breaks past the target audience and is a film that many people will enjoy. One would expect the topic of a girl pretending she is having sex with all these guys to lead to jokes of a sexual nature, but the jokes and humour is very tame. The one-liners are especially funny and credit must definitely be given to the script writers. “Easy A” is not a tear jerker or in any means is very deep, but it is a great film to watch without having to think too much. There is nothing really spectacular about the directing or the cinematography. It’s a film that relies more on the script and the wording than anything else. It is a very simple comedy.

The other big thing that makes “Easy A” work is Emma Stone. She is absolutely perfect as Olive and is just hilarious. She is witty, sarcastic, clever and insane all at the same time. Minus the fact that she is lying and pretending to be a floozy, she is the way you would have liked to have been in high school. Well, maybe not the way you would have liked to have been, but definitely someone you would’ve liked to have known as there would be a laugh a minute and never a dull moment. It is a credit to both her acting and Will Gluck’s direction that she is such a great character. Stone stands above all the over young actors as they all give rather mediocre performances in which nothing is really special about their roles in this film. Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson are both hilarious as Olive’s parents. They don’t have much chemistry between them on screen, but the laughs they create make up for it.

“Easy A” is far off being a contender for an Oscar. It is not overly fantastic, but the humour just allows for good movie viewing. The quick banter and witty one liners make this a movie which people who aren’t in their teenage years can enjoy. It may also give teenage girls the idea that if they think they are an outcast because they are a virgin, it is far worse being an outcast because you are the complete opposite. And there is nothing wrong with knowing that.
7.5/10

Wall Street:Money Never Sleeps

Year: 2010
Director: Oliver Stone
Cast: Michael Douglas, Shia LaBeouf, Carey Mulligan, Josh Brolin

In My Own Words
Well, it’s been a long time in between drinks for Gordon Gekko. I watched “Wall Street” for Business Studies while I was in school (stop trying to guess how old I am, it was way after the film actually came out so you can’t win this one). I’m thinking that the real reason the teachers got us to watch it was to take a break from teaching for the day, but I’m assuming that their reason for us to watch it was to learn about business ethics. That if we are unethical we will end up in jail like Gordon Gekko. It must’ve worked because as far as I know, none of the girls I went to school with are in jail. It was hardly the most exciting film for 15 year old girls to watch. “Wall Street” is definitely an adult film. Not because it has adult content in it, but school children aren’t able to relate to it in any way, shape or form. It’s long awaited sequel isn’t a younger person’s film either, however the admission of Shia LaBeouf may bring a younger audience into the cinemas. If so, they may not have the same movie experience as they did when going to see their heart throb in “Transformers, but at least they won’t end up in jail for fraud.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” is the long awaited sequel to “Wall Street”, which means that, like it or not, it does have a level of expectation attached to it. Those who were waiting for a huge Gordon Gekko extravaganza, then it’s not that. However, if you haven’t seen “Wall Street” or think that less Gekko is better, you may not be disappointed. The much updated version of the 1980’s corporate drama is one of those films which you will sit on the fence about. Neither a failure, but far from a classic. Jake Moore (Shia LaBeouf), a young, up and comer on Wall Street who is going out with the infamous Gordon Gekko’s (Michael Douglas) estranged daughter, Winnie (Carey Mulligan). It has never been an issue, but when Jake’s mentor and father figure, Lewis Zabel (Frank Langella) commits suicide and he then proposes to Winnie, he becomes completely intrigued by his future father in law. Although he tries to tell himself that he has got in contact with Gekko for Winnie’s , it is clear that there are more selfish motives involved on Jake’s behalf.

What fans of the original “Wall Street” will find is that this film isn’t as centred around Gordon Gekko as many would have hoped. However, for people who are not fans of the original or those who haven’t seen the first, you don’t need to have seen it to understand it or enjoy it The film is more about Jake and Winnie rather than Gekko and his daughter or Gekko and his future son in law. By the focus not being purely on Gekko himself, the film can be judged as a stand alone film rather than have the stigma of a sequel be in the way.

There are some truly good things about “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps”. For one, the directing is quite superb, as one would expect from Oliver Stone. He makes some interesting choices in camera shots, but they work. There are some scenes were the choices he makes on the way things are shot are quite beautiful and spectacular. The only thing that can be criticised about the cinematography is that at times, it seems like Stone tries to do too much and is trying too hard to impress with what he can do and what can be done. The script is well written and has just the right jargon for the subject matter. The only criticism is that it is really quite predictable. There are no surprises hidden in the film at all, which can make it quite tedious. It is also very slow at times and is very slow getting to the point.

Michael Douglas is back to his best as Gordon Gekko. His performance this time around isn’t quite as effective as it was in the first film (sequel stigma rears its ugly head). It’s his actions in the script which make him the scheming Gekko, rather than his acting. Shia LaBeouf unfortunately seems miscast in this film. He is made out to be a young Wall Street yuppie, but it is hard to tell from his performance that he is as ambitious and money hungry as the film tries to make him out to be. He can actually seem a bit pathetic at times. His acting isn’t all bad, but his performance should have been done with more arrogance or the role should have been given to another young Hollywood male. Carey Mulligan once again gives a heartfelt performance and takes her role as far as it can go. Her only fault as far as her character is more a criticism of Stone’s direction than her acting is that she spends so much time crying and being depressed that her character of Winnie can be extremely morbid and almost painful. Mulligan still manages to give an extremely realistic performance and lacks nothing in her acting. Frank Langella also must be commended for his performance. Langella is never one to not give 100% in his roles and this is another one of his successes.

“Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” will have its fans and its cynics. It’s ironic that there is more chance of non-fans of the original “Wall Street” enjoying this than fans of the original enjoying it. Don’t be afraid to go and see this film if you don’t enjoy the first or even if you haven’t seen it, because you may be pleasantly surprised. If you are a fan of the original, still do see it, but don’t expect it to be a direct follow on from the original, which would be impossible anyway as the original was released 23 years ago. Clear you mind and go to see the film purely as a stand alone.
6/10

I want to know more about......
Michael Douglas
http://www.moviecritical.com/2010/10/michael-douglas.html

Shia LaBeouf
http://www.moviecritical.com/2010/10/shia-labeouf.html

Carey Mulligan
http://www.moviecritical.com/2010/10/carey-mulligan.html

Carey Mulligan

DOB: 28th May 1985
Place of Birth: Westminster, London, UK
Film Debut: “Pride And Prejudice” (2005) as Elizabeth’s younger sister, Kitty

You may remember Carey from....
• The Greatest (2009) as Rose, the girlfriend of a boy who is killed in a car accident. Carey co-starred with Pierce Brosnan and Susan Surandon in her first US production
• An Education (2009) was the film that made Carey into a star. She played Jenny, the schoolgirl who cannot wait to grow up, but learns some very hard lessons when she does. Her role in “An Education” earned her a Best Performance By An Actress In A Leading Role nomination at the 2010 Academy Awards.

Shia LaBeouf

DOB: 11th June 1986
Place of Birth: Los Angeles, California, USA
Film Debut: “The Christmas Path” (1998) as Cal

You may remember Shia from.....
• Disturbia (2007) was the film which catapulted Shia into stardom. Shia played Kale, the rebel teenager who is placed under house arrest and comes to believe that his neighbour has committed a terrible crime.
• Tranformers (2007) as Sam Witwicky, a teenage boy who befriends a Transformer and thrusts himself into an ancient battle. Shia was the envy of every male when he was teamed up with Megan Fox in this film and in its sequel , Transformers 2: Revenge Of The Fallen in 2009.
• Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (2008) as Mutt Williams, the motorcycle riding son of Jones’ old flame, Marion.

Michael Douglas

DOB: 25th September 1944
Place of Birth: New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
Film Debut: “Cast A Giant Shadow” (1966) as a jeep driver



You may remember Michael from...
• Romancing The Stone (1984) as the adventurous soul Jack Colton, the object of Kathleen Turner’s Joan’s attention.
• Fatal Attraction (1987) as Dan Gallagher, the married man who commits adultery and makes a huge mistake by doing so.
• Wall Street (1987) as the charismatic and unforgettable Gordon Gekko, perhaps one of the most memorable businessmen ever to grace the big screen.
• Basic Instinct (1992) as Nick Curran, the detective who is investigating a murder in which a woman he is becoming further involved with may be responsible.

Happy 1st Birthday Movie Critical! And now for something new and exciting......

Happy Birthday Movie Critical! To celebrate our 2nd year, Movie Critical's is expanding!

Have you ever been watching a film and thought "Now where have I seen that ator before?" Or when you hear someone talking about a movie or you read a review and think "I have no idea who you are talking about!" Movie Critical is now going to help you out now more than ever!

When you are reading our reviews, we will now also be your point of reference for the actors in the film! On the same page as the reviews for the latest movies, you will also find a link to the stars Movie Critical pages. Their Movie Critical page will give a basic bio of the star, as well as tell you where you may have seen them before. Not only this, but on their page you will also be able to tell everyone what you think of this star!

This is a very exciting new beginning for Movie Critical! For those of you who are film makers or actors, this is also a great opportunity for you. We will be able to give you and your starring actors a great source of publicity and extra coverage. If you would like your film reviewed by us, please do not hesitate to contact us via e-mail to see your film reviewed on Movie Critical.

Hope you all enjoy this new era of Movie Critical and thankyou again for a great year! We can't thank all of you enough for the support, we couldn't have made it without you.

Nicki Price
Movie Critical Head Writer and Founder
movie_critical@hotmail.com

The Other Guys

The Other Guys
Year: 2010
Director: Adam McKay
Cast: Will Ferrell, Mark Wahlberg, Eva Mendes, Michael Keaton

In My Own Words
I love a movie which gets mixed reviews. I’m not referring to the movie reviews you see on TV or read in magazines, but the reviews from the people who really matter in your life. The one’s who’s opinions you really care about like your family and your friends. The majority of people will listen more to the ones close to them regarding whether they should see a film rather than the media. So it intrigued me to no end when one half of the people I know tell me to see a movie and the other half tell me to wait until the DVD. When a situation like this arises, damn it I am going to see the movie at the cinema! If someone normally hears that a movie is bad from a friend, they normally won’t see it, even if someone else they know says that it is good. Me on the other hand, my mind works another way when it comes to movies. If people are conflicted on whether it is good or not, then I’m sure there is going to be plenty to talk about after I see the film! Nothing like a good debate about film! Who needs parliamentary question time when we can all sit around and talk about movies? Maybe if Australia had got Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott to discuss their favourite movies before the election, it would have been over and done with a lot quicker.

Maybe the difference in opinion for many people in this film comes from whether they are Will Ferrell fans or not. I don’t believe Mr Ferrell’s humour is quite for everyone. He does definitely have a cult following though. However, like everything, there is always one film which will break through the haters expectations and a wider audience will enjoy it. I don’t think this is one of those films though.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“The Other Guys” is funny. There is no denying that, but oh does it try hard to be. Subtlety is definitely not the order of the day in this film and although it is not a fantastic film, it is not a complete dud either. Allen Gamble (Will Ferrell) and Terry Hoitz (Mark Wahlberg) are two cops who are not the heroes and do not have any hope of being so. They are always in the background watching everyone else take all the credit and are the laughing stock of their beat. Not only that, but they intensely dislike each other. Even when they do happen to tap into something that doesn’t seem quite right, no one seems to take any notice of them. Gamble and Hoitz find that by working together and remaining outcasts, they are actually able to accomplish more than what they and anybody else would’ve thought.

“The Other Guys” tries very hard to be funny. This is more so at the beginning of the film where the jokes just seem predictable, old and forced. It is as though director and writer Adam McKay was almost worried that people wouldn’t find the movie funny, so he had to try and cram as many things that the audience may find funny in so that he couldn’t lose. However, this lack of subtle humour seems to calm down towards the middle of the film and there are actually some very funny parts. The film is not deep by any means and one cannot take it seriously, mainly because of the presence of Will Ferrell. Not to say that Ferrell cannot do a serious film or carry on a serious role, because he did so in “Stranger Than Fiction”, but in a film which is first and foremost a comedy and has him in it, there is no hope for a tearful moment. There is definitely good character development though. Each main character has a back story and an entertaining one at that which does make the film more enjoyable to watch. The special effects and action sequences are very impressive, but unfortunately there isn’t nearly enough of them throughout the film.

Will Ferrell is much like he is in the majority of his other films. He is very funny in parts of the film, but he doesn’t give anything in “The Other Guys” that sets his role as Allen Gamble apart from his others. Gamble is a very entertaining character and it is obvious that no one else could have played this role besides Ferrell. He does play it perfectly to his ability, but it won’t be one of the characters he will always be remembered for. Mark Wahlberg gives an easy performance in his role as Terry Hoitz. It is a different role compared to what he has done in the last few years and it is interesting to see him in a comedy role. He is not the funniest person in the film, but doesn’t do a bad job by all means. Eva Mendes plays Gamble’s wife, Sheila and although Mendes isn’t known for her comedy roles, is really quite funny. However, it is almost painful to see Michael Keaton in a role such as this.

“The Other Guys” could almost be described as a try hard comedy in its first half, but redeems itself in its latter half. It’s interesting and colourful characters also help to save this film from being completely terrible. It could be so much better than what it is, but those who love Will Ferrell movies will love it.
5/10

Salt

Salt
Year: 2010
Director: Phillip Noyce
Cast: Angelina Jolie, Liev Schreiber, Chiwetel Ejiofor

In My Own Words
Lets talk teaser posters and trailers. When I say teasers, that’s exactly what they are. They don’t reveal anything about the movie, or if they do, they only give you very little to work off. Not that it is a bad thing to let everyone know before the movie comes out what it is about because the majority of people want to know what they are getting themself into, but teasers create an air of excitement about the movie. I bring this up in this review because that is very much our first exposure to “Salt” was. The first poster released was a close up of Angelina Jolie’s face with the tagline “Who Is Salt?” What did this poster tell us about the movie? Besides the fact that Jolie is in it, nothing. Love her or hate her, there is no denying that Jolie has an amazing amount of star power. This is the first movie she has done since the birth of her twins, Knox and Vivienne and it is as though she never left. She is still box office magic whether people know what the movie is about or not.

Of course this tactic doesn’t work if a big star isn’t in it or if it isn’t a Disney movie. Disney is great at teasing. Let’s use “Up” as a case study. The poster and trailer for it reveal not much more than it is a movie about a man who lives in a house with balloons attached to it and his young friend and dog. The movie could go in any direction from there. “Inception” is also a great example of teasing. I would’ve given an award to anyone who could tell me what “Inception” was about after watching the first trailer released. It gave nothing away, but everyone was intrigued because there was Leonardo DiCaprio, it was directed by “The Dark Knight” director Christopher Nolan and there were some amazing special effects. I love the idea of teasers. They make the movie watching experience just that bit more exciting even before you step into cinema. Terrific marketing .

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“Who Is Salt?” The perfect tagline and the question that bugs you for 100 minutes through “Salt” and will for days after you have seen it. It is so refreshing to see a smart action film, one that combines great special effects, a smart script and a tough female lead. It is rare that an action film will challenge you so psychologically and rely solely on special effects and bomb blasts to move the film along and keep the audience entertained. Not to say that these aspects of the film aren’t entertaining or hurt the film, because they certainly do not. Evelyn Salt. She’s a CIA agent who is blissfully married to an arachnologist. Or is she who the strange Russian man who has turned himself into the CIA says she is, a Russian spy who is on a mission to kill the Russian president?

There is not much more you can say about “Salt’s” plot without giving away too much about the film. It is brilliantly written and exceptionally well directed by Phillip Noyce. It is far more mentally challenging than one would expect it to be based on the plot summary. It is not a lazy film by all means and far from a mindless action film. Throughout the film, it is a struggle to see where the film is going as it is completely unpredictable, another sign of great writing and directing. The cinematography is very well done with some great special effects and action shots throughout the film. For once, an action film that is not based on an old TV show, old movie or a comic book. It stands alone as a great story in itself. It is almost as though writer Kurt Wimmer, took a politics and decided to throw some action into the equation.

The Noyce and Angelina Jolie combination proves to be a winning combination, as it did now over 10 years ago in “The Bone Collector”. She is perfectly cast as Evelyn Salt. Not only does she cover all bases that a female action star should, she also shows her true acting ability. Everyone knows Jolie is a great actor, she has shown her versatility in many of her films and this is just another one of those films. She goes between two extremes in this film and does brilliantly at all times. She creates a great deal of mystery and the film would be nowhere near as successful as what it is without her. It is interesting that this film was originally written with a male as the lead, and that male lead was to be played by Tom Cruise. When he pulled out, Jolie stepped in and the film was rewritten with a female lead. It’s hard to see how the film would have been as good with a male lead, and having Tom Cruise as the lead would have been too much of a flashback to “The Firm”. Schreiber is as good as he can be in his role as Salt’s business partner, Ted Winter, but is better in some parts than others. Chiwetel Ejiofor is very good as Peabody, changing the way the audience sees him throughout the film.

Although Jolie is Salt and is the star of the film, she is not the only part of this film that makes “Salt” a winner. It is extremely clever and very well made. It is not only action fans or Angelina fans that will enjoy this film. Although a mentally strenuous film to watch at times, it is completely refreshing and a tribute to Noyce and to Jolie.
8/10