Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.....

If ever there were a movie to get me out of my retirement, due to work commitments, not my absolute love of movies..it is this one..well actually it could have been a few others as well, but let's stick with this one for now.. After much hype, Quentin Tarantino's 9th and dear god I hope not penultimate movie has arrived...and what a move it is. Set in the late 1960's in Hollywood (where else) this is the story of many people, but mainly fictional TV Cowboy actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt man, Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt), and if those two aren't enough to get bums on seats throw in the divine Margot Robbie as the late actor Sharon Tate just for good measure. This is a meandering tale, much more gentle in many ways than other Tarantino movies. I went back a second time to see it because I knew I had just missed too much the first time, mainly due to anticipation of the plot. Rick lives next door to Sharon and her director husband Roman Polanski, who is the latest hot director after Rosemary's Baby. Rick is beginning to feel like a 'has been', he lost his TV show 'Bounty Hunter' because he wanted to pursue a movie career that didn't take off, and Cliff, well Cliff is just happy to drive Rick around since he lost his license, do odd jobs and hang out with his buddy. It is set specifically in 1969, a year notorious in Hollywood for the horrific crime of the murder of an 8 month's pregnant Sharon Tate and three of her friends by the so-called Manson Family, engineered by Charles Manson. To say too much would be taking away so much of the joy of this film. It is much less violent than other Tarantino films, though don't worry fans when it comes it's as bloody as anything that has come before..and less verbose to some extent. Other critics have called it a love letter and that seems an appropriate title. It's still incredibly funny as you would expect. Leo is, as always flawless in his role of the narcissistic, fragile, egotistical and vulnerable Rick, his piercing blue eyes welling up regularly when considering his career and needing constant boosting from his best friend Cliff. It's also wonderful to see him exercising his considerable comedy chops, he is truly hilarious in some scenes and his advertisement in the credits of a long running Tarantino brand is a hoot. Brad Pitt as the laconic, cool and capable Cliff is a revelation.. lurking beneath his gentle and very sweet-natured exterior is a solid steel foundation..I loved that he declined the understandable offers of carnal knowledge from a very beautiful, very underage young girl..I don't care if it was because he didn't want to go to prison, he still said no! There are some incredible scenes, his encounter with Bruce Lee one of many standout moments, as is his ability to not only pull of double denim in the first scene, but double WHITE denim in the final one..legend of the thrall indeed... Margot Robbie had a very hard role, playing an extremely tragic character could have gone either way, but she pulls it off with absolute aplomb and nails the optimism of a woman who's career is rising with the uncertainty of new motherhood beautifully. The relationship between Rick and Cliff is central and crucial and seeing these two together really begs the question, why on earth haven't they worked together before? Their chemistry is nothing short of magical and I would have loved to have seen more of them together, hanging out watching Rick's latest guest starring roles.. The whole films weaves in and out of these people's lives, adding new characters and old favourites, some for only a scene..Al Pacino's understated turn as Rick's agent reminds us of how superb he can be when he's not being shouty..my tip is Brandy for best supporting actor in a female role.. I have always thought of Quentin Tarantino as a real romantic and this movie does nothing to sway me from this view. His love of movies, TV, music, culture and Hollywood are very real in this film, but also his love of people and redemption as well.. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood..the ultimate fairy tale..10/10.

Nightcrawler

Ok, full disclosure, Jake Gyllenhaal is one of my all time favourites, not only do I believe he's quite gorgeous (as I'm sure he would me should our paths ever cross), but I also think him a wonderful and versatile actor, but as a true professional I have reviewed this movie as objectively as is possible... Nightcrawler is a fascinating film, the story of a ghostly Louis Bloom (Gyllenhaal) who scrapes a living in the shadows by dubious means. The first scene he is caught stealing wire fences and tries to bag a job with the man he sells the stolen goods to, he's a slick negotiater from the start but is told flatly 'I don't hire thieves'. Undeterred he stumbles across an accident on the way home and sees Joe Loder (Bill Paxton) videoing the police pulling a woman from her vehicle, after questioning him, it turns out that Joe is a 'nighcrawler' who arrives ASAP to crime scenes and sells the footage to news channels. Louis' mind is ticking over through those huge unblinking baby blues..So he sets up, after selling a stolen bike, his 'company' and begins his own internship in the murky world of nightcrawlers. To do this he hires a homeless uncertain guy named Rick whom he pays $30 a night after a lengthy discussion to navigate and keep watch the car whilst Louis is filming. Gaining his first newsworthy footage he takes the film to Nina (Rene Russo, it's been too long) the night editor of a news channel and is given his first pay check. Nina is definite about the type of film she wants to increase the ratings, bad things done to white middle class people by minority groups, "if it bleeds it leads". Louis takes this challenge very seriously and sets out to get the best footage by any means necessary with great success,knocking back Joe Loder's offer of him running a second van for him to continue freelancing. This ambitious sociopath, trained by the internet, chants self help management forum mantras, and just when you feel he's tipped over to the wrong side of sane...he smiles and you forgive him for a moment, at your peril. Soon enough he's pressuring Nina for a date, when she succumbs as a 'professional courtesy' he embarks on his own special brand of seduction bordering on blackmail, he wants her and by god he's going to have her..if he doesn't he can always take his films elsewhere, and haven't her ratings gone up recently and where can she go from being a night editor on the lowest rated news channel if he doesn't get her the footage she needs? Louis justifies all his actions by stating that everyone has the choice to decide what they do, and to a certain extent he's right. He delivers the thinly veiled threats in his sing song patter, bordering on psychopathic but never over the top..Don't feel sorry for Nina for too long, scratch the surface and another Louis is lurking just underneath. There are a couple of people who are not morally bankrupt, Rick is surprisingly sensitive and Frank who works at the news channel both attempt to be somewhat moral compasses, but to no avail. Nina and Louis railroad everything and everyone to climb the greasy career pole. The film culminates in a house invasion turned multiple shooting that Louis arrives at before the police and films the grisly footage, but it's what he does with his knowledge of the perpetrators that makes the lines of reality and fiction blur so goulishly, does Louis somehow believe he is directing his own movie? This film is a dark,satirical swirling mass of steamy LA nights, humour as black as tar and blind, unrelenting ambition and Jake is a revelation as Louis. Initially completely out of synch with the world around him, he slowly realises if he is to realise his dream of owning his own production company he must relax when people call him 'Louie' instead of Louis. Like a starved vulture he watches people's every move..what ties they wear, how they react in situations and attempts to blind them with his business babble, generally very successfully, because Gyllenhaal manages to balance Louis with just enough charm to weigh up his freakishness, never crossing the line to an unbelievable character. His tirade to Nina when he realises the shift of power is in his favour, demanding the news anchors quote his deluded business name during the running of his films and the blink and you miss it reference to her meeting his bedroom demands reveals that she does indeed dance with the devil. Close to the end of the film, there is a scene where he brings Nina the murder scene footage..they are feet apart, ever drawing closer as he discloses what he has caught on film, explaining he made her wait because he wanted to increase his bargaining power, there is an uncomfortable eroticism that makes you feel that he's not just talking about his films...Thin, haunted, hunted, self assured, full to the brim with throwaway quotes, confidence and swagger, Louis is one of the ultimate anti-heroes..It's great to see Rene Russo on screen again, a shame it's because her husband is the director, she deserves much more airtime than that. Nevertheless it's good to see her sensuous brand of desperation and last taste of youth mixed with the flattery and disgust of this younger man's attentions that can help her scrabble her way once more to the top.. Nightcrawler...creeps up the back of your neck and makes your heart thump a little faster - 8.5/10

Love, Rosie

Anyone who has never visited the UK, but has seen 'Love Actually', 'Notting Hill', the abysmal 'Four Weddings' and now the equally twee 'Love, Rosie' would get off the plane at Heathrow and expect to be met by a handsome blundering blustering fool, a pretty, quirky ingenue with pigeon toes, their respective families all in hand knitted jumpers and best friends who were either ugly and funny, gay and funny or hair dyed pink, crazy clothes...and funny. Granted, the British have a great sense of humour, but we don't all spin off witty repartee at the drop of a hat or use the 'f' word in every sentence, well most don't. It's almost the same as if you only know Australia from films, you would think that everyone lived in the '70s, were bordering on manic depression and all dealt drugs...hang on a minute.... Anyway back to 'Love, Rosie' here we go....Rosie (a luminous Lily Collins, how could the bald pated drummer Phil have produced such a beauty?) and Alex (Sam Grant..sorry, Claflin, handsome, floppy haired..crooked smile) have been bestest friends since they were little. Now they're almost grown up and share a drunken kiss on Rosie's 18th birthday, only Rosie doesn't remember and Alex is too spineless to tell her..so they go to their school leaving party with other people to spite each other and so the tedium begins...Alex gets a scholarship to Harvard Medical School which is amazing considering it's a graduate school.Rosie is supposed to go with her bestie to study hotel managment but gets a condom stuck up her snapper on her first shag and has to stay in good old Blighty to raise the product of this dangerous liaison whilst Alex oblivious to it all is in Boston living it up with...yes his ugly funny mate with a gorgeous neurotic sister that he ends up with after finally twigging why Rosie never got on the plane two weeks after him...so they almost get together about twenty five times until it gets so irritating that you wish they just forgot who each other were and got on with their very English lives...the life decisions the pair of them make are enough to make you seriously doubt the entry level for admission to Med school.Rosie's mate, yes the one with the red hair who's..funny (Ray Winstone's daughter, nepotism anyone?) tries to sort her out a few times, but even she gives up, all the while Rosie's brat grows older almost than Rosie and gets an Alex of her own...how very claustraphobic...I won't give the ending away...but I'm sure you all know where it's going..going..gone and to be honest, you just breathe a sigh of relief at the end. There's no romance you just hope and pray that they're smart enough to take their clothes off before they finally go for it.. The problem with this film is it's just really lazy. The acting is actually pretty good. The script is pretty abysmal but the premise is one that we all love, boy meets girl, takes a while to get there but eventually does, everyone's happy..but this one is just so drawn out and ridiculous that it's just not worth the bother. Love, Rosie...Just, Lazy. 3/10.

Kim and Kanye….

Ok, I understand that this is not a review of a movie. I just feel utterly compelled to rant! This is a review of course of the song and video that is causing such a buzz…Bound 2 by Kanye West…. Oh, where to begin? The video perhaps… It's basically real life scenes of really really bad paintings of horses running, the ocean and mountains, the kind of thing your nan would have hanging over the fireplace interspersed with a very serious Mr West pouting and either moving with what one can only assume is a very nasty tic, riding a motor bike..(look mum no hands!) and/or (shock horror!) shagging his well advertised squeeze, the voluptuously vapid Kim Kardashian she of the huge boobs and very tiny waist, as all good D listers should have after just giving birth to a child. Much has been said about the sexual content, Kimmy is seen laying back bored as a viewer with an IQ in double digits is when watching one of her reality shows, jiggling very slightly on the motor bike (I think it's a Vespa but I don't really know my bikes so don't quote me). The jiggling or possibly quivering is supposed to insinuate that she is having sex with Kanye, she is seen in various positions and her face I believe is supposed to portray some kind of plastic ecstasy.. one can only imagine really because her lovely surgeon chiselled features never move, even with the mechanical quivering. Whilst Kimmy is a-jiggling, Kanye is getting down to the serious business of either simulating giving her a right good seeing to or nuzzling into her neck shouting 'Bound!' loudly, seriously, has he been checked out for Tourettes? or sneering at the camera with all the venom of my six year old son in full tantrum mode.. My point to this is there is NO sexual content….its about as sexy as watching my 76 year old Dad twerk….but slightly more cringeworthy. It's no shock that these two have sex, they do have a baby, the ridiculously named 'North' whose career is stretched out before her before she can even sleep through the night poor little mite. It's hardly front page news….Kim and Kanye have sex!!! The shock is that they are happy to portray their sex life as about as exciting as what I was doing yesterday….cleaning out the gutters…although to be honest, I was listening to the mighty Silverchair, so my activities yesterday were infinitely more stimulating than Kim and Kanye getting it on on the vespa trying to avoid the horse poo and hurricanes that were blowing the day they decided to shoot. My main issue is with the lyrical content of this utter dross. Some people have been outraged that Kim's waist has been whittled down to the size of a small chipolata (no offence Kanye), but no where have I read any protest about what utter bile the lyrics are… they are so bad that honestly I can't write any of the lines in full here… They are filled with either the highly imaginative words 'bitches' or 'hoes' and he does actually refer to his best beloved, the mother of his child as a bitch too. He also refers to what he would like to do to her on the kitchen sink..hope the dishes have been done first..and would desperately like his one and only to supply him with some extra ladies to shag for his birthday.. I can see why because he exerts so little energy he would have plenty left over for other lucky ladeeezzz. He frequently uses the 'n' word.. if it has a on the end instead of er is it still as offensive?!! I know that this word has been 'reclaimed' by some members of the black community, but I still have the right to be utterly offended just as I am by the words chinky, red indian and wop…I don't have to be Chinese, Native American or Italian to know that these words are heinous. Kanye West is an idiot so bloated with his own sense of self importance, he's carrying half of it in his little chipmunk cheeks..he is revered by celebrities, 'A' Listers even that are condoning the use of the words and derogatory lyrics about women. This man has a daughter for God's sake. Everyone just stands by and applauds…and he has the full endorsement of another equally talented high profile 'celebrity' his lady love Kim..how could she sell her daughter out, or herself for that matter? What are these two thinking? They are teaching little East that it's ok for her to be referred to as a hoe and a bitch, and it's fine for her fame hungry mum to be seen naked and being shagged by her humourless talentless father while he's fully clothed and calling her a bitch…she will of course love these two highly unlovable creations and will think that their word is God…my heart bleeds for her and for all this generation to have clowns like these two to look up to… This brings me to the genius parody performed by the very talented James Franco and Seth Rogen..Bound 3…it is fabulous and to be honest, the more I think about it, it's a quite a philosophical work of art…we crack up at James' scowling face and postulating nonsense and adore the sensuality of Mr Rogen's hirsute back whilst he coyly makes love to the camera, but they are just copying the original video WORD FOR WORD..SHOT BY SHOT. That's it..so why should we take one seriously and one not? It's a sad statement of the world we live in..shame on us all..but for the record..even the brain drains Kim and Kanye know who I'd rather share a Vespa with... Bound 2…Bound to make you ashamed of the celebrity adulation gone crazy 0/10..Bound 3 helps to restore your faith in humanity..a little. 10/10...

The Great Gatsby

Although I've still been going to the movies once a week at least, I have had a hiatus on blogging reviews due to being hideously busy work and home wise. However, if there is one film that I will come out of my self imposed exile to review, it's this one old sport. Bring out the Baz haters, come one come all to the verbal and personal Luhrmann lynching, and bring your family too to give him a good kicking while he's down..except he's not down because the people have voted with their feet and the theatres are full. I wonder if these nay sayer reviewers have even seen the movie, or understand the book by F Scott Fitzgerald for that matter. Baz Luhrmann is a wonderful director of some genius, who has a certain style, it may not be to everyone's taste, but it is perfect, perfect for The Great Gatsby. I personally adore all of his work except for Australia which was woefully miscast but still had some magical moments. Baz is a story teller in the truest sense of the word. His movies are fairy tales or fantastic fables, not documentaries or word for word transcripts of books. I won't go into the story too much, most of us are very familiar with it. It is an American tragedy as Greek as they come. It's a story of enduring misplaced love, friendship, lust, jealousy, greed, hope, selfishness, singleminded devotion... and carelessness. Sadly, for people as cynical as me, it's a confirmation of all that is wrong with the world. But it's a beautiful story. Seen through the eyes of writer turned banker Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), it's the tale of Nick's next door neighbour, Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) a billionaire party thrower who never seems to attend his own events and is illusive in the story and for the first part of the film. Nick has a beautiful cousin, Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan) who is married to a brute of a man, Tom (Joel Edgerton), rich, arrogant and compulsively unfaithful. Nick is thrown into a world he is unfamiliar with, parties and gossip, sex and alcohol. Gatsby slowly befriends Nick and asks to meet Daisy through him, at Nick's house. It turns out, however, that Jay and Daisy know each other from five years before, and so unravels a story so heartbreaking, it will seep into your psyche leaving you with a sense of utter sadness yet with a lingering feeling that perhaps something wonderful may just happen. Much has been made of the fact that the film is too over the top. Well, yes it is, in the parts that it's supposed to be. The parties are an orgy on the senses. As they are in the book. It's an integral part of the story that these gatherings are debauched and wild. It's kind of the point. They are shot beautifully and are such an assault on the senses you feel as if you've gate crashed them yourself. Much criticism has been thrown at Luhrmann for the use of modern music, especially Jay Z's involvement. I'm not a huge fan of that type of music so write honestly when I say that it just fitted in perfectly. There was music from the twenties era too in the film, but bringing more up to date styles ties us to the story in a contemporary way and makes us feel more connected to the movie rather than it feeling like a period piece. Baz has always done this, listen to the music in Moulin Rouge! and I doubt very much whether the band Garbage were around in William Shakespeare's time, but their music was used to devastating effect in Romeo + Juliet. The other parts of the film were not at all over done, unless it was called for as in the scene where Nick and Tom party way too hard with Myrtle and friends. A lot of it was incredibly nuanced and quiet, a perfect and deliberate contrast to the lunacy of the parties. Tobey Maguire has been singled out as being rather bland. I think that's the whole point. He's the anchor, the narrator and is the everyman. Everyone else has large personalities, he is the quiet voice of reason. I thought his performance was heartfelt and set just the right tone. Joel Edgerton as Tom Buchanan was also critiqued as being a 'one note player', I disagree. Joel Edgerton is a well known and respected actor/producer in Australia, and America will be seeing a lot more of him in the future, I predict. The character of Tom Buchanan was only really one note; I have met a few Tom Buchanan's in my time (though sadly not as attractive as Joel) and there wasn't much else to them but the one note, sometimes only a quaver.... Tom does reveal a different side as well towards the end of the film, and is in no way two dimensional. Isla Fisher is superb as Tom's blousy mistress Myrtle Wilson, I would have liked to have seen more of her, as is the again underused Elizabeth Debicki as Jordan Baker, the Art Deco beautiful love interest of Nick. There is even a blink-and-you'll-miss-it appearance by the mighty Baz himself. Carey Mulligan would not have been my choice for Daisy. In no way do I mean this disrespectfully or unkindly as she is very lovely... but she is not beautiful. After seeing it though, I have changed my mind, not because I suddenly think she is beautiful, but for two other much more important reasons. Firstly, she is an excellent actress and physically perfect in stature and demeanour. The second reason is thanks to the immense talent of Leonardo DiCaprio. His performance is so convincing as a man in love, that you realise it matters not a jot what you think of her. Jay. Loves. Daisy. I have read no negative comments about Leonardo's performance, but not nearly enough praising it. For the first twenty minutes you barely see DiCaprio. He is a shadow, glimpses here and there, a tantalising side view, a build up of curiosity. And then... against the back drop of a wild party, the music crescendos, fireworks explode and in this orgasmic build up...Jay Gatsby appears...and it's like the sun coming out after an earth shattering storm. His incredible beatific smile lights up the screen, this golden man, full of mystery, life, love and hope. But there are plenty of beautiful men in Hollywood. Leonardo DiCaprio is so much more than that. His performance displays the multi dimensional aspects of a man on the edge. Gatsby's self assuredness melts away whilst waiting in Nick's home for Daisy to arrive, revealing some fabulous physical humour from Leonardo an as yet untapped talent for comedy. The heartbreaking moments when he is just looking at Daisy, it's rare to see an actor so convincingly portray someone so in love, heart and soul. The furtive glances and sideways looks as he's desperate to shield those he cares for from his financial dealings and shady business associates. Jay's desperation as things unravel with Daisy and his unwavering loyalty, innate goodness and singleminded hope for the future. If I was reviewing any other actor I would say it's a career defining role. For Leonardo it's not, all his portrayals are of this calibre. He is without a doubt, the greatest American actor of all time. This is a brilliant heart breaking roller coaster movie, with some truly perfect moments filled with romance and the glamour of the movies. Thank You Baz Luhrmann. A more fitting title for a film I couldn't find. THE GREAT GATSBY: Gatsby. The Great 10/10.

Amour

Had I realised that Michael Haneke's Oscar nominated 'Amour' was an ironic title, I may have watched this film from a different angle. After watching this movie, I came home to read some reviews, and they are all without a doubt positive and waxing lyrical, especially from the high brow newspapers who mutter about depth and masterpiece a lot. Oh well, I never did like to follow the crowd. The first scene begins lightly enough, a crew of ambulance workers break the doors of a fantastic Parisian apartment open wearing masks to help overcome the smell, and on the bed is a decomposing elderly lady dressed in her finest surrounded by chrysanthemum petals. Amour tells the story of Georges and Anne, an octogenarian couple who are musical academics. They enjoy a night out at a concert and arrive home to find their flat has been broken into, but nothing appears to have been taken and it's not mentioned in the film again, apart from Georges making a few calls to get the door fixed. It may have been an analogy for the fact that their lives are about to be changed by an intruder, but also may have been a time filler, because there are a lot of those. Anne suffers a moment of alert unconsciousness, like a daydream, which Georges is alarmed about. As well he should have been as it was a stroke, but that is only disclosed near the end of the film. From this point on, the story goes on its inevitable downward trajectory, initially Anne is paralysed on her right side but has all her mental faculties about her, but after suffering a second devastating one, is left bed bound and rambling, with Georges left with no option but to hire some much needed help. Their only daughter played by Isabelle Huppert visits occasionally with her philandering husband (the English rotter) but seems more interested in real estate than her mother's state. The conditions in which Georges and Anne live become untenable and as a crisis is reached, George makes a decision about Anne and her future. Most of the film is set inside this sprawling apartment, very chic and utterly comfortless. The film is shot often in almost real time, recording every mind numbingly routine chore that we all do every day. Don't get me wrong, I love to watch minutes of a woman vacuuming the carpet as much as the next person, but what some could take as a profound social comment on life's prosaic patterns, I just saw as a director who couldn't think of what to do with the time he was given. Talk about banging on, yes, we get it, life is repetitive and really really boring at times, and we have to do things that we find mundane for people we love, yes, it's not just George who has to, we ALL do!! The actors, French royalty Jean-Louis Trintignant as Georges and Oscar nominee Emmanuelle Riva did a sterling job, if the portrayal was meant to be of two people completely disconnected from each other, a couple of poissons froid if you will. There seemed to be absolutely no chemistry between them, even when scenes of them reminiscing should have been revealing. There is a scene where Eva the daughter is telling Georges that she used to like listening to him and her mother making love as it comforted her, mmm how very French of her, I couldn't imagine them shaking hands let alone bumping uglies. There are scenes where Georges has to get very close, maybe more intimate with Anne than they have been in years, which could have been explored and should have been poignant, they just looked awkward. It's ok that other relationships were fraught, but surely the central characters should have liked each other a little? Anne's former pupil now a well known pianist drops in. It's a very awkward scene, as Georges doesn't tell him about the stroke before he wheels her in, and then when the pupil dares to ask about it, he's brushed aside as if her stroke was something to be ashamed of, and a mysterious illness that is incredibly rare. Anne seemed to have a difficult relationship with her only daughter, it was all very stilted and there was no familiarity between any of them. Whilst I'm on this rant, when Anne comes home from having her first stroke, we see Georges going through (endlessly it seemed) tasks of picking her up and doing things for her. It was painful to watch as he is not a youthful man, but also it was so pointless. He was obviously a smart guy and there are so many aids available to assist carers, he didn't have to struggle like that, and there were things that she could have used to make her feel more independent. Hugely frustrating to watch. We then see that Anne doesn't want to live anymore in this state, because she feels useless, well tell that to my ex-colleague who was paralysed down his right side who came into the office every single day. I didn't understand why this made her completely unable to enjoy life in any capacity especially as she was a music teacher so much and could still enjoy that, rather than being the national pole vaulting champion which was obviously off the table now. Maybe I'm just too practical to enjoy this type of film. I did have sympathy don't get me wrong, but there seemed to be a lot of self pity and misery dwelling, which just irritates me frankly. The thing is, these people are in their eighties, sad as it is, didn't they expect it? When you are lucky enough to get to your eighties, you can't really think that nothing will ever happen to you? It's a sad but inevitable part of life, it's not a tragedy like it would be if they were in their thirties. Also there is barely any humour in the whole film. A smattering of the gallic sort, but it's no laughing matter. Even during life's darkest moments, humour is lurking, it's what keeps us sane. Not in this lovely apartment, at one stage Anne states that she doesn't want to see her son-in-law because she can't take his British humour. I would have sold my first born for a touch of it in this movie. The finale was slightly skewed and supernatural and the ending shot of Eva walking into this magnificent piece of real estate made you think more that she was rubbing her hands with glee at being left it all, rather than ringing her hands with the misery of losing both her parents. I usually love French films and was really looking forward to this, I felt very disappointed that it's turned out to be a case of the Emporer's new clothes. There was little to no traces of love in this very cold self important drama, except maybe for the little pigeon who probably deserves it more than anyone else. AMOUR: What's love got to do with it? 3/10

Cloud Atlas

OK, here goes...I haven't read the book of Cloud Atlas, but from what I understand it was considered almost unfilmable. Mmmmm I think that the directors Lana and Andy Wachowski (The Matrix) and Tom Twyker (Run Lola Run) may just have proved that wrong. The plot is way too intricate to even outline, but I will give it a shot. The film is set in six time frames, the first in 1844 involves an American lawyer on a ship who befriends a stowaway slave, next up 1931 in which a haunted gay man seeks out a famous composer and becomes his amanuensis (musical assistant), 1973 and a female journalist investigating a scandal involving a nuclear station. On to 2012 and light relief in the form of a publisher who owes a lot of money and is shipped off to the mental health unit from hell by his fed up brother, skipping forward to 2144 where a fabricant is saved from her miserable life in New Seoul to become the planet's saviour and finally to the 24th Century and an uncomplicated goat herder's life is turned upside down when a strangers comes to his community and needs help. And that's about all I can give you folks. This movie is completely magical. It's three hours long, but I wish it had been longer. The magnificent cast are quite an eclectic mix of actors and it works beautifully. Throughout the film, the same people appear, in different forms, genders and races. Some might have a problem with that, but it's crucial to the film and I found it totally inoffensive as everyone crossed races, caucasian to asian, black to jewish, asian to european so you can be equally offended by it all or not. The stories are all intertwined, and the message is nothing new, but it's such a beautiful message that only the most jaded are tired of it being told time and time again. I am a committed atheist, reason and logic are my masters, but oh how I love the concept of eternal love and souls being bound to each other forever, so romantic and pure. This is the core of the film, the eternal questions we all ask, why do we repeat the mistakes of the past? Is love so powerful that it crosses oceans of time? Are we all connected? Can love change someone? Are we bound to people and if so why? It also confirms, for me at least, that love is the only thing that really matters. That we seek comfort and kindness and it makes our lives better, or changes us if we receive it, give it or if we are spurned. Themes of dominance, evil, slavery thread through it too, you can't have love without hate after all. There are the questions raised of spirituality and organised religion and the questioning of tyranny, but I felt that these questions could be tailored to our beliefs. A Muslim would draw his own favourable conclusions to the same scenes that I did. Visually it's a masterpiece. From the salty seas, to the Blade Runner style of New Seoul, it is quite perfect. The music is just stunning, pushing the boundaries of our feelings even further and it accompanies the words of the script very admirably. The post apocalyptic pidgeon English is wonderfully melodic and child like and used to great effect. All the acting is superb, give or take a couple of ropy accents from Tom Hanks, but he makes up for that with a suprisingly buff turn as the goat herder. Ben Whishaw is as always a pure haunting joy to watch, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent and Hugo Weaving are here amongst others. Which leads to my final point, Hugh Grant is a lazy bugger. His turn here is outstanding, just as rich and nuanced as any of the other actors, so why has he plumped for the easy road all these years? Cloud Atlas is not an easy watch, and it won't be to everyone's liking, but to me its a creative masterpiece, thought provoking, with a multi layered great big beating heart at the centre and organised time travelling chaos all around the edges. What more could an old romantic like me want? Cloud Atlas: A compendium of beauty, doesn't always tell you the direction but you'll be very glad you opened it up. 9/10.

Side Effects

And so it seems that Steven Soderbergh is disillusioned with Hollywood and the film making process and is taking a sabbatical/retirement. Let's hope it's a sabbatical and he gets his mojo back, after all he gave us amongst others 'Erin Brokovich', The 'Ocean's' franchise, 'Sex Lies and Videotape', 'Traffic', 'Magic Mike' and the underestimated and ridiculously sexy 'Out of Sight'. If it's a retirement, we're losing a really wonderful and inspired director and for that we who love movies should all feel a great loss. For his grande finale, he has chosen to direct a little gem of a thriller, Side Effects. Jude Law plays Dr Jon Banks a psychiatrist who treats a suicidally depressed woman named Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) whose husband Martin (Channing Tatum) has just been released from prison after four years for insider trading. Dr Banks is up to his sea green/aqua blue eyeballs in work and takes on a paid role to trial a new anti-depressant ablixa which Emily eventually ends up taking after the incompatibility of other anti-depressants. After a shocking turn of events, Jon finds himself under the magnifying glass and turns to Emily's former psychiatrist Dr Victoria Siebert (a frail looking Catherine Zeta-Jones) for some answers. Emily ends up in court and Jon's ethics are questioned when an incident involving a former female patient is uncovered. Nothing however is quite as it seems and as he digs deeper, Dr Banks uncovers a dark world which threatens to ruin his career and his marriage. Jude Law is very convincing in his portrayal of an initially relaxed professional at the top of his game who slowly unravels as events take over. He is a somewhat overlooked actor, dismissed as a 'pretty boy' but he's very accomplished and without vanity, not a hint of botox or indeed weave in sight, which makes him all the more attractive and I haven't seen a man look as good in a cardi since Daniel Craig in 'Girl with the Dragon Tattoo', something about English men and woollens evidently...Rooney Mara is also good as the isolated and confused Emily, she's not a million miles away from her role as Lisbeth in the aforementioned movie, but she shows promise, though appears much younger than her character's age of 28. It's refreshing to see the likeable Tatum as something more than beefcake, again, he has a promising career ahead if he sticks to these meatier (pun intended) roles that he seems to be able to cope with. Whilst we're on the subject of Channing, is it just me or does he have a face that is most unusual? It's also a delight to see Catherine Zeta-Jones back on form as the spiky secretive Dr Seiber, though her make up artist would do well to steer clear of the darker lipsticks and Malificent-like eyebrows, we're not in the nineties now and it's quite distracting. It was a thrilling surprise to be transported to a rip roaring thriller, which I thoroughly enjoyed. This wouldn't be a review without a few little gripes though would it? I felt that all of the guilt was unrealistically shifted on Dr Banks, I really don't think, in fact I know that in real life this wouldn't have happened. The series of events wasn't his fault, and his partners turned on him quicker than you can say psychoanalysis. Also, in some nicely played scenes, his marriage is depicted as happy, he's a thoughtful and kind husband and stepfather, a little too hard working and distracted but better that than a jobless loser. I do think Jude Law has, for want of a better analogy mellowed like a fine wine, a very fine wine so I may be biased. Call me old fashioned but when you are lucky, oh so lucky enough to marry a handsome, kind, funny and smart man that fancies the pants off you and loves your son, don't you own him the benefit of the doubt rather than pissing off at the first sign of trouble? If I'd been him, I would have thought twice about whether I would want a faithless wife back after that, maybe pick myself a nice single nurse who shares the same curious phenomenon as he of a right pointed ear to dote on or something..... The message of the film, if there is one seems to be the compulsion that the modern world has on fixing things, the relentless pursuit of happiness which leads to so many anti-depressants being plied onto the masses. Also that if a colleague/partner/loved one messes up or is in trouble, finger point, leave them to flounder and look after yourself without a backward glance, which a jaded cynic may say seems to sum up the twenty first century. Anyway apart from these small issues, it's a great film, exciting and fun with some Hitchcockian twists and turns. It seems that they do make them like they used to, or they did before Mr Soderbergh retired/sabatted. SIDE EFFECTS: The Law of Attraction 7/10

Django Unchained

Imagine the scene, my excitement at sitting in a packed movie, in Leicester Square, London, having had a great night with my oldest and dearest friend, waiting for the start of Quentin Tarantino's much anticipated new movie..having loved most of his work (Grindhouse movies notwithstanding) yes Tarantino's slightly self indulgent, but I love the fact he's always pushing boundaries, testing the depths of cinema and astounding us with his witty heartfelt scripts, meticulously handpicked cast and buckets of cartoon blood. After the marathon three something hours, I left the throngs of people slightly disappointed. Call me dedicated, or slightly obsessive, but I went back today to see if I may have missed something in the first viewing. My love of Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill and my adoration of Inglourious Basterds drove me to it... Django (Academy Award Winner Jamie Foxx) is a slave, unchained by a German dentist turned bounty hunter Dr King Schulz (Double Academy Award winner Christophe Waltz) he needs Django to identify some brothers (fraternal not cultural) so he can kill them, and in return offers him his freedom. After the brothers have been duly sent to hell, Dr Schulz offers Django a deal, to bounty hunt with him, (kill white men for money, what's not to like?) for the Winter, and then he will accompany him to Mississippi to track down his beloved german speaking wife Broomehilda von Schaft ( Von Schaft, really Quentin?), sold to a different slave trader. After the bloody Winter turns to a bloody Spring, Dr King is as good as his word and they track Broomhilda to the delighfully named CandieLand, a cotton plantation run by the cruel and sadistic sister-loving Mandingo-fighting advocate Calvin Candie (Academy Award nominee, nominee, not winner) Leonardo DiCaprio and his right hand man, Stephen (an unrecognisable Samuel L Jackson) an equally cruel and sadistic black slave. Will Django get his wife back? If so, just how will they pull it off? Well, the first thing to say is that the second time around, without the merlot haze clouding my judgement, I'm pleased to report that I really enjoyed this, loved it in fact. The universe is aligned again. But my initial gripes remain valid in my humble opinion but just not quite so vehemently as before. The interiors, costumes and locations are faultless. The scenery is quite spectacular from the magnificence of the mountain ranges to the claustrophobic oppressive elegance of the plantations. There were some beautifully surreal scenes that were worthy of Tarantino's name, standouts were the bag on the head scene with the forerunners of the Ku Klux Klan and any scene with Candie and Stephen. Christophe waltzes around the movie with the words tripping off his tongue as if he were born to speak them. The times when Waltz, DiCaprio or Jackson were on screen was sheer poetry, they are all masters of their craft. It's the first time we've seen Leonardo DiCaprio as a truly evil man, and whilst I'm sure some of the lines were very hard to say, he spits them out with an unctuous, reptilian sensuality which is truly terrifying and more than a little fun to watch. Why the Academy keep overlooking one of the greatest actors, not just of our generation, but in history, is just about beyond me. The dialogue artfully captures the complex, absurd and downright unfathomable relationships between black slaves/freemen and white slave owners. I don't think I've ever seen a film which brings home just ever so slightly as close as I ever want to come to seeing how society behaved in those shocking times. There has been debate that mandingo fighting was not a sport associated with slavery, I actually think that's irrelevant. Plenty of horrendous crimes against humanity happened then, let's not quibble about how people were tortured. The script was not as eloquent or maze like as Inglourious basterds sadly. There were the usual enjoyable in-jokes, Dr King is an advocate of racial equality, Candie's lawyer was happy if you called him Leo, and at the dinner table, Candie's sister asked Dr King to regale them tales of the circus, a nod to his turn as ringmaster in 'Water for Elephants' perhaps? The plot was a little too straighforward for a Tarantino film, and there seemed to be a glaring character disparity that was pivotal to the plot. Towards the end of the film, Dr Schultz makes a life changing decision that redirects the course of everyone's lives. This decision just didn't ring true, his justification was "I just couldn't help myself" but throughout the rest of the film he's portrayed as a calm and reasoned thinker, always one step ahead of the game when others around them are losing their head. He surely would have thought of a much more clever and dynamic way of getting Candie back than the path he chose? Which leads me to my main issue with this otherwise magnificent film, and it's a big issue, which splits into two roads. Quentin Tarantino is a genius at picking the right man for the job. When others wouldn't give him voice over work, he saw the potential in John Travolta and gave him the gift of Vincent Vega. Time and again we've seen it, most recently with Christophe Waltz, catapulting him from European to Hollywood fame and in the process, he rightfully earned himself two supporting actor Oscars. In Django there are a number of actors who crop up who you would never have imagined being cast but who are brilliant. Sadly, Quentin's judgement was clouded (possibly by merlot?) when he cast Jamie Foxx in the titular role of Django. Love them or hate them, Quentin's actors all have one thing in common, charisma or in the words of Dr Schultz, panache. Poor Mr Foxx has neither. I have no idea what he's like in real life, but on screen, he shows not an ounce of humour or flair. Sorry to upset the applecart but there I've said it. I just didn't care enough about his character, Django should have been dynamic, swaggering and not a little tongue in cheek. The others, yes, but him no. In a Tarantino film you don't have to be a brilliant actor, although it helps, but you do have to be in on the joke, Jamie doesn't seem to have been told the punch line here. I would have liked to have seen Don Cheadle in the role, a great actor with professional comedic timing and a twinkle in his eye. Failing Don, what about bringing some unknown talent to the fore? This leads to the my other point, there was just no chemistry between Kerry Washington, who rather insipidly played Broomhilda and Jamie Foxx, the two in what is an essentially very romantic film, mustered up about as much sexual tension as a badger and a book. Candie and his sister had more, now how sick and very Tarantinoesque is that? DJANGO UNCHAINED:Needs to unchain the heart a little 8/10.

The Sapphires

Australia used to be renowned for really great heartwarming comedies, think Muriel's Wedding, Priscilla Queen of the Desert, Strictly Ballroom. Then there has been a huge period of angst ridden drug addled movies, very dark, but some brilliant, think, Wish You Were Here, Animal Kingdom. Well, the Sapphires is somewhere in the middle. It's loosely based on the true story set in 1968 of three sisters and a cousin, Gail (Debra Mailman), Julie (Jessica Mauboy), Kay (Shari Sebbens) and Cynthia (Miranda Tapsell), who are semi discovered by a wayward young Irishman Dave (Chris O'Dowd). The girls are singing in an outback town talent show, dogged by racism, and their choice of music is Country and Western. Dave wants them to sing sweet soul music, and so they do...beautifully. They pass an audition to go to Saigon to perform for the groups, and go on the adventure of a lifetime. There is some love and pain along the way, one of the girls is estranged from her cousins as she was removed from them as part of the stolen generation when she was young, and as a result is confused about her roots. The oldest of the group, Gail is adamant that her cousin should pick a side, but this being a predominantly happy film, it all works out in the end. Firstly, the music is wonderful. One of the girls, Jessica Mauboy was a finalist in one of Australia's talent competitions and she is the absolute standout. Her voice is amazing and she exudes a real star quality. The character of Gail is played by Deborah Mailman who is a well known actress in Australia. She has a warmth and likeability which is lucky because her character is a right old fishwife. Dave falls for her, and all I could think of was, honey, if you think her militant controlling ways are bad now, just imagine what she'll be like in ten years, not a pretty sight. Chris O'Dowd, again is always endearing, again, that's lucky because he has little to redeem him, a thirty year old alcoholic loser with little to offer Gail other than his first wife. I'm also not really one for the whole pick a side culture thing. The truth is, I think that people are just people and there's no need to pick a side to identify with if you don't want to. I'm a look forward kind of girl, but it had important messages about tolerance that we can all learn from. The parts shot in Vietnam were good, as although they were mainly fun, they did touch on the horrors of war and gave a little feeling of how terrible it must have been over there. More of a dvd film I think, never the less, it's a bit different and a bit of fun. THE SAPPHIRES: Probably more like The Cubic Zirconias...5/10.

Step Up 4 Revolution

Two movies about topless dancing blokes in one week, at this rate I shall have to see a Dr. ..Right, let’s start with the rant..... A formulaic, prosaic movie about a decent guy Sean (Ryan Guzman) from the wrong side of town who falls for a poor little rich girl, Emily (Kathryn McCormick). He expresses his inner soul through the medium of street dance, along with his homies who are equally decent and equally from the wrong side of town. Only the leader, Sean seems to be able to keep a job, and that’s as a waiter, all of the other guys hang around with their arms folded all day sneering, getting tatts and shaking their heads like so many nodding dogs. Still, they aspire to get 10,000000 hits on youtube with their ‘flash mobbing’ so they can win a fortune. Yet more fodder for today’s Generation X-Factor that life is about being famous and cool...sigh, the youth of today...so the poor little rich girl also wants to be a dancer, all be it a thoroughly modern one. Daddy owns a huge corporation, (evil rich man) and wants to turf these lower class wholesome good people off their land and rub his hands unctuously whilst his minions count the blood money. So ‘the kidz’ lead by Emily decide to flash bomb and dance to protest the plight of these salt of the earth family minded peeps. How do ‘The Mob’ manage to afford Apple products, dozens of them? It took me until my forties and a nice little tax rebate to afford one of those beauties. If I was a less suspicious person, I would suggest drug money, but surely no way - these kids say no. The ladies all seem to dance with their legs permanently akimbo dry humping the air like crazed nymphomaniacs. Classy. Also not attainable, not with my hips...And the romance...oh yes he seems so right and wonderful now, but I couldn’t help thinking that in fifteen years time, when he’s slobbing out on the sofa, having exchanged his six pack for a six pack and a wife beater, dear Emily will be thinking, why did I fall for a guy with no education and no prospects? Love ‘aint enough, and the education divide will seem like the Grand Canyon once the first flush of love has, well, flushed. His naivety which once appeared so charming will soon seem like utter ignorance. Maybe I’m just a tad too jaded to be watching this movie.... But then I thought, you know I am not the demographic that they’re after. Oh no, they are after Generation X-factor, Gotta dance kids. And so to the positives... The choreography and innovative dance scenes are fabulous and mindblowing. Just superb. They will have you amazed at how the human body can move and it’s really refreshing to see young people up on screen that are actually supremely talented, and the love story? Well, a cynic I may be, but it was very reminiscent of Dirty Dancing, in fact at the end I was almost expecting Sean to utter the immortal lines “nobody puts Baby in a corner..” I loved that movie, as younger kids will love this one. It’s harmless and spectacular. The Mob are fighting for a cause, and if Flash Mobbing is the worst those pesky kids get up to, well, what’s the harm in that? STEP UP 4: Just occasionally made me feel as though I may have one more dance left in me....5/10.

Magic Mike

There’s a little bit more to Magic Mike than first appears. It’s the tale of Mike (Channing Tatum last seen in 21 Jump Street), who is maybe not magic, but certainly puts a spell on his audience of baying ladies at the local male review strip club where he works. Mike has bigger ideas than stripping, he’s an entrepreneur and dreams of making his own, rather gaudy in my opinion, custom made furniture. Mike takes Adam (Alex Pettyfer, I am Number Four) under his wing after meeting him on a building site and noting his loser qualities. Adam quickly takes on the role of new boy in the strip club and seems to have found his niche. Unfortunately whilst Mike seems to be able to handle the heady heights of male stripperdom, Adam has a little more trouble and soon starts to go off the rails, what with all the free drugs and..ahem..ladies throwing themselves at his lovely lithe frame. Who knew that there was a sleazy side to the sex industry? Luckily for Adam, he has a sister to watch out for him, her name is Brooke (Cody Horn, Rescue Me) and she reluctantly strikes a flirtship with Mike. The Club is run by the indomitable Dallas (Matthew McConnaughey, no introduction needed) an occasional stripper and full time sleaze. Mike starts to think that maybe there is more to life than adulation, shagging different women every night and making a bank roll of dough. When Dallas starts to show his true colours, and Brooke starts to question his integrity, which path will Mike choose? Magic Mike is a well worn formula of retribution and reform, but it works well. thanks mainly to a tight script and the charms of Channing Tatum and Mr McConnaughey. Now Channing is not my cup of tea, but he has an innate sweetness and is hugely likeable, and man, can that boy dance! It’s also nice to see Matthew McConnaughely stretching himself in a role (pun intended), rather than his usual lazy shirtless rom-com phone-ins, he actually shows what a great actor he is. He’s a sinister blend of erotically charged sleaze bag, with a bit of viper thrown in for good measure. Ironically, this is one of his best roles to date, and he is shirtless for most of the time..difficult to watch, but I managed it. The dance scenes are quite mesmerising, you don't know where to look first... Incidentally watch out for Riley Keough as strung out groupie Nora, for she is none other than The King’s, Mr Elvis Presley’s granddaughter. Alex Pettyfer shows potential as Adam, the only real piece of bad casting is Cody Horn as Brooke. She has all the charm and charisma of a pair of your nan’s knickers. Her expressions run from apathy to disappointment, but she does those two well. Not sure what the lovely Mike sees in her, probably his nan... MAGIC MIKE: It’ll have you entertaining thoughts you haven’t had since the Take That ‘Pray’ video...ABRACADABRA! 6.5/10

Hugo

Well, The Academy and I agree on something. Hugo is a phenomenal film. Lovingly directed by Sir Martin of Scorsese, it's the story of Clockmaker Hugo (Asa Butterfield), an orphan who lives in the train station in the city of light, Paris. Before his father (Jude Law) dies, he finds an automaton in the museum he works in and brings it home for he andHugo to repair. After his father's death, Hugo focuses on repairing his precious gift as its the last link to his dad. In the station lives a crusty old toy maker, George (Sir Ben Kingsley) who is tormented by Hugo as he tries to prevent him from pinching various toy parts. George is Godfather to Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz, with an IMPECCABLE British accent), and she befriends Hugo. When Hugo discovers that Isabelle is wearing the heart shaped key that he's been looking for to make his automaton work, it sets a chain of events off that will change everyone in the station's life....forever. The images of Paris are so magical and haunting, it's as If they've been sprinkled with dairy dust. Forget Disney, it turns out Scorsese is in fact Tinkerbell as well as Taxidriver. The acting is superb. Asa Butterfield does a terrific job, his huge blue eyes and dark mop of hair are enchanting. There are lots of familiar faces and they all do a wonderful job of bringing love to the screen. Sascha Baron Cohen is the Station Master and for once, I do not detest his screen persona, which is a pleasant first for me. For,this is a true love story, to the craft of filmmaking and a gentler time that is lost forever. If I was to have one little criticism, it is tht whilst the child actors are great, at times, as there is so much dialogue between them, it is a little stilted at times. As if they're waiting for the next one to speak. That is a little nitpick in this sweeping fable of love, loss and finding the truth about yourself and the people in your life. HUGO: The love in this film writes itself, and is the key to the heart of this great movie. 8/10.

The descendents

The Silver Fox won a Golden Globe for his performance as Matt King, a Hawaiian lawyer who has a lot on his plate.He's dealing with a wife in a coma from a boating accident, two wayward daughters, the conundrum of selling land with his extended family for a small fortune, oh and his dying wife was also cheating on him with Shaggy from the Scooby Doo movies (Matthew Lillard). Not much to deal with then. The movie is set in the ridiculously picturesque paradise of the islands of Hawaii. Part of the film's message is that it doesn't matter where you live, problems are problems. Yes, but a nice view eases the pain, take it from someone who lives somewhere not dissimilar to Hawaii! This film should have been great, but it just wasn't. Clooney's performance is good, he's a good actor of course, but he's done better. I felt he was just phoning it in. Matt is supposed to mellow and learn from these difficult experiences, but it isn't apparent, his role in Up in the Air was far superior, more nuanced, must less shallow. The daughters are good, but again there is little depth to them, and the older daughter Alexandra (Shailene Woodley) brings along her stoner boyfriend Sid (Nick Krause) who is daft as a brush. Slightly reminiscent of the Keanu Reeves character in Parenthood. In that movie though, initially he seems to be a half wit but brings a thoughtful balance and insight to the family. Sid is just a half wit, a nice half wit but he just seems to amplify everything that's wrong with the film. It deals with some very tough subjects which can be funny in real life, but the humour just falls short of the mark and seems juvenile. I came away just feeling dissatisfied, and the next day can barely remember it. Another thing that totally ruined it for me was the organ donation scene early on when the Dr is telling Matt that his wife won't make it. It is techniquly inaccurate which I find irresponsible when we need to promote organ donation. The Dr states there is no brain stem function and then talks about her battling on for years. Brain stem death is death. It's not a persistent vegetative stae as was implied. He went on to say that as she wanted to donate her organs so they would have to disconnect hermfrom the ventilator.Dont go to that hospital no matter how beautiful the setting. People that are generous enough to gift their organs need to be kept ventilated until their organs are removed and given to others to save lives They are not disconnected, left to die and then operated on. If the body has no oxygen, neither does the heart, kidneys or lungs and they all die. This kind of shoddy research really irks me. They could have just googled the protocol for heaven's sake! It's an entertaining film, for the time that you're watching it. But Gold for the Silver one, I would have put my money on Leo and I haven't seen J Edgar yet. The Descendents: A relatively good film, but won't go down in history as a classic. 6/10'

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

In the interest of public disclosure, I feel that I should declare that I find Daniel Craig insanely attractive. I will try to give a professional objective review despite this fact. This is a much more difficult review than I initially anticipated. I will begin by saying that I was a "Larsson virgin" when I saw the first, Swedish version of Dragon Tattoo. I enjoyed it thoroughly and it inspired me to read the trilogy, and watch the subsequent films. There is much controversy about this English language remake. Unfortunately, there will be comparisons throughout this review, due to the fact that the movies were made only two years apart. The plot of the first film is quite a web and very complicated, but I will endeavor to give a brief overview. Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is a disgraced journalist who used to work on an independent magazine' who dished the dirt on a high powered businessman without enough proof. He is hired by multi millionaire Henrik Vanger ( a regal Christopher Plummer) to investigate the death of his niece decades ago under the guise of writing his biography. Lisbeth Salander is the computer hacking genius who was initially hired by Vanger to investigate Blomkvist but then becomes his assistant as the plot thickens and they are drawn into a tale of serial murders and abduction. Compounded by this is the fact that Lisbeth is a ward of the state and classified psychopath and her benevolent ward suffers a stroke, throwing her to the mercy of a new ward, who has no morals whatsoever. So how does this movie stand up to the incredible scrutiny of the original? Very well actually, if not better. "What?!" I hear you shriek in disgust. Yes, you read it right, if not better. David Fincher (Se7en, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Fight Club) is a master story teller, and it shows. The look of it is pristine, from the hard core titles, to the interiors of the rooms, to the bleak Swedish countryside. The editing and script is tight, and the music enhances but never invades. So far so good. The acting is superb. It has to be said that in the Swedish version, apart from the Dragon lady herself, the acting was somewhat wooden. Daniel Craig totally embodies Blomkvist, in the books he's quite the lady's man and is much more believable than Nyqvist in the original. There is also a depth to him and an almost bumbling quality which makes him very human. He also looks hot in glasses and plaid pajamas, but that's beside the point. What of THOSE scenes? If you have read or seen the movie, you will know what I mean, If you don't, you're in for a shock. They are not quite as confronting as the Swedish film, but they still pack a huge punch, as they are intended to. So to the big question. Is Rooney Mara any good as the legendary Lisbeth Salander? Well, she cleverly plays it differently, this is no impersonation of Noomi Rapace. Mara's Salander is far more fragile and androgynous. You have far more sympathy for her, rather than admiration. Lisbeth has been through a huge amount in her life, and her vulnerability along with her courage is palpable. Yes, the ending is different form the original but then that nding was different again from the book, and in a lot of ways this ending is more in tune with the book. Fincher focuses more on relationships and humanity, there is much more from Blomkvist's long term married love and partner in the magazine, played by Robin Wright, in her usual classy style. There is a sadness that envelopes this film and the characters, and I feel that this film benefits from it. It is a stand alone film, thrilling, stylish, very dark and with surprising warmth. THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO: It's written in ink, this film will become a permanent classic. 8/10.

Sherlock Holmes A Game of Shadows

Newman and Redford, Astaire and Rogers, Laurel and Hardy and now Downey Jr and Law to add to the list. These guys have such a brilliant on screen chemistry, it is a joy to watch. The plot of A Game of Shadows is pretty complicated, Watson (Jude Law) is getting married, Moriarty (Jared Harris) has reared his ugly head and done away with Holmes' only love Irene Adler (Rachel McAdam) and a gypsy named Sim (Noomi Rapace) is looking for her brother. It is up to Holmes (Robert Downey Jr) and his genius mind to crack the case with the help of his not that reluctant partner Dr Watson and an array of Victorian ne'er do wells. Guy Richie has hit the jackpot with this franchise. I love the Sherlock Holmes books, but he injects a life and vitality that is in the books, but not most of the screen portrayals. The effects and cinematography are sublime. The costumes, superb and the sets give a real feel of what it might have been like in those grimy times. Downey Jr's eccentric Holmes, mumbling, jealous, insightful and highly intelligent is a sexually charged tour de force. In one fantastic scene we see Holmes against the clock with Don Giovanni playing simultaneously, Mozart and Downey Jr, have I died and gone gone to heaven? Jude Law's Watson is smart, witty, kind and charming a perfect compliment to Holmes and so much better than the bumbling side kick so often portrayed. The support is good, although Noomi Rapace on paper seems perfectly cast as the willful gypsy Sim, the girl with the dragon tattoo seems to have lost her fire disappointingly. The fight scenes are brilliantly executed as before and there aren't too many of them. This film doesn't take itself too seriously at all and there are loads of laughs. Sherlock Holmes should be taken for what I think it is meant to be, rip roaring, sexy, smart and dynamic, now who could ask more from their blockbuster? Sherlock Holmes A Game of Shadows: The appeal is elementary 8/10.

The Iron Lady

Meryl Streep even almost surpasses herself this time. what a remarkable portrayal of Lady Margaret Thatcher this is. The film is rather surprising, it is more a sentimental journey than documentary; more love story than critique of a Prime Minister that so divided a nation. Told in flashback sequences, it lightly traces Thatcher's struggle from grocer's daughter to leader of Great Britain. Jim Broadbent plays Denis, appearing to Margaret in hallucinations years after his death that it appears she has never quite recovered from. His performance, whilst very good gives Denis a buffoonish quality that he could never really shake in reality. The young Margaret is played well by Alexandra Roach but the delightfully named Harry Lloyd steals the eaely scenes as Denis looking eerily like his namesake Harold Lloyd, handsome and mischievous. The film touches on the highs and lows of her formidable eleven year term, but never quite scratches the surface, maybe that's for another film. The movie is beautifully acted with a stellar supporting cast, particularly Olivia Colman as Carol Thatcher. The film, whilst poignant, almost feels liike a made for tv movie, apart from the standout surely Oscar nominated performance of Streep. The Iron Lady: There shall be but one mistress and no master 6/10

The Ides of March

Mr Clooney is a wonder. He was made for the role as the ambitious democratic Governor Mike Morris, with his almost communistic style posters and his charisma oozing over the offices. His right hand men are Paul Zara (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and superstar Stephen Meyers (Ryan Gosling). There is an intern too, Molly Stearns (Evan Rachel Wood, shaping up to be a real acting contender). Molly is bold and vivacious and her and Meyers embark on a little affair, lucky Molly. Meyers is wooed by Tom Duffy (Paul Giamatti) who works for the other democratic candidate and it's then that things start to get ugly. Meyers is party to a tragedy, and his loyalty to Morris and the team are tested. I don't pretend to understand American politics that much, but I sure do enjoy trying to work it all out. It's an age old tale of love, honour and loyalty. Back stabbing and clawing your way to the top.
The actors are truly terrific. Gosling's character has been accused of being naive for one so smart, but I disagree. Wisdom comes with age, or it's supposed to and Ryan portrays Stephen with a ruthless charisma that could charm the knickers off just about anyone. What to say about the incomparable Seymour Hoffman? Does he ever put a foot wrong? Loyal, vulnerable, shambolic, and yes, I'm going to say it, sexy as hell. Keep Mr Clooney, I'll have Philip please. I've always loved him. Don't ask me why for I do not know. Paul Giamatti (no, I don't fancy him) is as always excellent and George Clooney is immaculate. If I have a critisicm it is that whilst enjoyable, once you leave the cinema, the movie is forgotten. There seems to be little substance to the story. Some of the boxes are a little too neatly ticked and the characters of Meyers and Stearns do very seem to have sharp changes in personality. It's a little too dramatic and a little too unbelievable. George Clooney directs as well, wonderfully. I read that Leonardo DiCaprio was initially going to play Gosling's character, but pulled out. It would have been a disappointing film for him to have been in, but he stayed on as producer, got to love that loyalty. The Ides of March: Et tu Gosling? 6.5/10

The Inbetweeners Movie

Ahh, the boys. Will (the smart one), Neil (the daft one), Jay (the filthy one) and Simon (the good looking one) are Inbetweeners. That is, they are in between being nerds and being cool. Floundering in the hades of life, if you will. The Inbetweeners is a tv series, and one of the crassest, wittiest and filthiest series I have ever had the good fortune to watch. Side splittingly funny. It was with much excitment that I went to see this movie, and it didn't disappoint. Simon is trying to forget his doomed relationship with his long time love Carli and after Jay's grandad's death leaves him loaded, the four boys decide to go on a relatively normal holiday to Malia in the Greek islands. My idea of hell from start to finish, not hades, hell. Things go badly from the start, the hotel is unbelievably bad, the nightclub they're lured into is dead. They meet up with four girls, more by luck than judgement, and strike up a friendship with them. The scene where they try and impress them through the medium of dance is nothing short of genius. There are plenty of crass scenes, old lady sex, Jay full frontal, fully clothed dry humping to name but a few. . Along the way, the boys do learn some valuable lessons, but will darling precocious Will lose his virginity finally? Some of this movie falls a little flat, you can't expect constant target hitting gags over an hour and a half, but generally this is a gem of a film. Will it offend some people? I surely hope so! It's not for the faint hearted, that's for sure. It manages a feat that most of the crass films don't, (apart from a tight and funny script), and that is that you truly care about the characters, not just our beloved boys, but also the ones you have just met. Just one snipe, would have loved to have seen a bit more of Mr Gilbert. Adam Sandler and The Hangover crew could learn a thing or two from their British cousins. Rule Brittania! The Inbetweeners Movie: Come and feed kitty, Will. 8/10.

Crazy, stupid, love.

Went to see this movie with my darling sister, and went again when I got back home. And again. It's the story of Cal (Steve Carell) and his wife, Emily (Julianne Moore), who were high school sweethearts. Emily reveals at the beginning of the movie that she slept with a man at work, David Lindhagen (Kevin Bacon). Cal is devastated and moves out. So begins his journey of reinvention with the help of 'the hot guy from the bar' Jacob (Ryan Gosling, oh my) with the hope of a reconciliation with Emily. Interwoven into the main plot is the story of Jacob a serial womaniser who is confronted and confused by love, Cal's son who is in love with the babysitter and the babysitter who is in love with Cal. It's about love in all its different forms. A bit like 'Love Actually' but far less contrived, far funnier, and far far sexier. Where to begin? Well, it's a rom-com in the best sense of the word. It's very romantic, and it's very funny. There are some truly stand out scenes. When Jacob takes Hannah home to his house, it's a heartwarming and funny conversation, one of the most romantic, sweet scenes I've seen in a long time, and oh Mr Gosling, those abs are obscene! He's flavour of the month for a very good reason. Intelligent and charming, not conventionally good looking, Jacob could have been an arrogant and dislikable character. Not in Mr Goslings very capable (I imagine) hands. Emma Stone plays Hannah, again, no wonder she's the darling of Hollywood, a real gem, likeable and funny, you love Hannah from the start. There is also the part where Emily phones Cal for help with the boiler. It's so charmingly acted, so true and simple yet the message is clear. Julianne Moore is stellar as always, beautiful and slightly haunted, we should hate her, but we don't. The kids are brilliant, as are all the supporting cast. Steve Carrell is just heartbreaking. He has the magical qualities of pathos and humour. You can't help but like him, even when he's really quite pathetic. This is a really beautiful, fun film. It will become a classic. There are some daft scenes but they work, and the ending even surprised and charmed this jaded veteran movie goer. I hate to admit it, but I am a romantic at heart, and this movie is just so damn romantic, and sad and funny. Just like life, except there's no Ryan Gosling.... Crazy, Stupid, Love: A bit crazy, not stupid, I love...9/10