The Social Network

How ironic it must be to Mark Zuckerberg to have founded the worlds biggest social networking site, when he himself, is anything but social. Now with David Finchers film bringing even more unwanted attention upon him, it must be a constant chagrin to Zuckerberg, when all he wants is to be left alone with his computer. Or so Fincher's ''The Social Network'' would have you believe. Based on Ben Mesrich's 2009 book, 'The Accidental Billionaires', the film is not, wholly based on 100% fact. This is something that writer Aaron Sorkin, or Fincher ever denied. Sorkin himself was been quite objective on his intentions. He has been quoted 'I don't want my fidelity to be the truth, I want it to be storytelling'. Sorkin wants to entertain, rather than educate his audience. Their intentions known from the start show just what they have achieved here. They haven't set out to fire out facts and events in black and white. They have set out to make a statement. It may be a document of our time, but not of the factual kind. It is yet another triumph added to the most excellent Fincher's list of impeccable triumphs.

When initial reports came out detailing Finchers new 'Facebook Movie', reaction ranged from baffled to outright horror. This was Generation X's movie punk wunderkind, and he was selling out? Fincher was a master of the macabre, of skewering perceptions of the serial killer genre, not once, but twice. He deals in worlds full of threat and darkness and menace. Of radicalizing notions of pop culture in cinema. Every shot is meticulously planned out, and every subject he draws upon, is researched to the max. Robert Graysmith, the author of 'Zodiac' maintains that Fincher got further than he ever did on the confusing, disturbing and very slippery case. Wasn't Facebook below him? Then something curious happened. Finchers backwards fairytail ''The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'' was released to much acclaim. Sure, some purists might have argued against his branching out to more saccharine subjects, but few could argue against the success of his wild genre change. An epic meditation on love and life, there was no severed heads to be found in boxes anywhere. If this was Fincher selling out, then the grace and beauty and simple power of his love story ensured that no one could argue his commitment to it. David Fincher is the consummate Director. He has too good an eye for detail, too much talent and too much range to simply sell out. Suddenly the prospect of David Fincher's Facebook didn't seem so bad. It was only when Aaron Sorkin was announced as writer, that people began to grasp what was in store for them. ''The West Wing'' is one of the greatest shows ever. While I myself have not seen the full seven seasons, I have seen enough of it to know just how finely tuned Sorkin's ear for dialogue is. It is a pleasure to listen to, and therein lies many of the reasons the show appealed even to those who had little or no interest in Politics such as myself. Sorkin writes drama stunningly. If he can make Politicians exciting for me, then surely he can make Facebook exciting for those who turn their nose up at such a subject. Despite what you may think, Sorkin takes Facebook seriously. Perhaps he takes it too seriously, I will go into more detail on that later, but for his commitment to the story he must be applauded. Because this 'Facebook Movie' is so far, front and center primed to take home a lot of awards come early next year.

Set in 2003/2004, the film concerns itself not with the rise of Facebook, but rather the rise of its creator, Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg), currently, the worlds youngest billionaire. The fact that he helped create the Facebook revolution is only all the more stunning that it came out of something entirely negative and ugly. Ridicule of others online. Zuckerberg himself is painted as someone who's genius is matched only by his ego. He wishes to be held by high esteem by everyone, yet holds nothing but contempt for them. Eisenberg portrays him wonderfully. He is a contradiction of mass arrogance. He seeks everyones approval and yet mocks them. He wants friends, and acceptance yet most people are a burden. A very unenviable task for Eisenberg, he is never less than compelling. Of course the legal spiderweb that entailed the creation of Facebook and its success is what focus is kept on. The linear shifts from its beginnings to the legal wranglings of Zuckerberg and his only friend, Eduardo Saverin, played here by Andrew Garfield propels the drama. That there is also the lawsuit of whether or not Zuckerberg stole the original idea from two Harvard rowing champion twins, shows the potential for much of the story to buckle under the burden of its talky weight. Fincher keeps proceedings fresh and distinctive and shows a wry eye for humour along the way. The soon to be the future Spider-Man, Garfield provides much of the emotion of the film. His fractured relationship to Zuckerberg fuels a lot of the drama on screen. At its heart, the film is all about relationships and the strain money and success places on them. Tension is only further exacerbated with the arrival of Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake). The original founder of Napster, his reasons with getting involved with Facebook may not be entirely honourable and yet it is he, who Zuckerberg looks up to and wishes he could be more like. Parker is everything Zuckerberg is not, but in the end one gets the feeling, that Parker needs Zuckerberg a lot more than Zuckerberg needs Parker. Parkers genius lies in making those around him think they need him when all he really is, is a mouth. Unfortunately, of the three leads Timberlake is the only weak link. While perfectly serviceable I could never once get by the fact that 'Justin Timberlake is acting'. He is not wooden and he can certainly deliver a line, but it is his mere presence that is sometimes too distracting. While this might be what the character calls for, I ultimately found that to be too true to the case in point. Timberlake was portraying a character, next to Eisenbergs and Garfields real people.

Sorkin's script is 166 pages long. Usually each script page counts for a minute of film and yet the film runs to just over two hours. Finchers way of getting the running time down, while still including everything the story needed and deserved was to merely get his cast to talk fast. Really fast. That should give you an idea of how rapid the dialogue is presented. From the off in a fantastic pre-credit sequence Fincher draws us into our leads. Two characters involved in quick rapid fire dialogue across a table. Character traits are immediately established along with motives and shifting dynamics. It is the perfect introduction into this Harvard elite Fincher presents us with, and shows how rash decisions can lead to huge consequences. Like the founding of a multi billion dollar online empire for example. Eisenberg and Finchers new 'Lisbeth Salander' Rooney Mara trade insults, barbed delusions about the world and a complete relationship break down all in the space of four minutes. It is a masterclass in dialogue and is arguably the finest and most important scene in the film. Sorkin litters his screenplay with choice moments of necessary humour. The film might get bogged down were it not for this. And yet, I cannot help but wonder if a lighter touch still might have worked wonders for the film. It seems to be lacking from a true sense of drama as there never truly seems to be anything at stake or anything for the audience to invest emotionally in. There is next to no surprises in the plot for the film to be fully captivating. Zuckerberg himself, seems to take a back seat to Saverin and Parker in the second half, which is a shame, as his downward spiral into loneliness and social rejection was one of the most intriguing aspects for me. Fincher however surprises again with his film. He is comfortable dealing in any genre he feels like and his extraordinary vision is evident in every frame. And in those twins, he creates the most seamless special effect I have ever witnessed as one actors head is invisibly grafted onto another actors body. Twice. And you thought an ageless Brad Pitt was good?

Verdict: 78%

David Fincher adds another impressive layer to his bow and Sorkin reminds just how peerless he is when it comes to dialogue. Trent Reznor provides a fantastic debut score and Eisenberg excels. However, the lack of any true drama and urgency and Timberlakes casting takes it back down from masterpiece status. A fantastic nights entertainment with one of the best auteurs of our generation is waiting for those who decide to log on.

''The Social Network'' Trailer

Buried

There appears to be a new sub genre getting ever more popular amongst film makers. That is the single location and very claustrophobic thriller. Very recently we had the horror "Devil" set entirely in a stalled elevator where one of its five occupants is a seemingly malevolent entity. In early January of next year Danny Boyles eagerly awaited follow up to "Slumdog Millionaire" is the shocking true story of an extreme sports fanatic getting his arm stuck under a boulder and resorting to desperate risks for his survival. The film "127 Hours" promises a stunning emotional roller coaster ride upon its release. Now however we have Rodrigo Cortés thriller "Buried". A film that takes a huge risk in setting itself entirely within a coffin. Cortés' genius lies in his unfaltering committal to his story. While such a small and confining space could make for a very dull nights entertainment for some films, "Buried" surprises in being one of the most heart stopping exciting films of the year, making stunning and very cinematic use of its small spaces.

Paul Conroy awakes to find himself living every persons worst nightmare. He has been buried alive in a coffin and it is in here that we will spend the next 95 minutes. A normal blue collar truck driver, Reynolds plays the everyman with stunning conviction. He is the embodiment of being caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is during his work in Iraq that he gets taken hostage by terrorists and finds himself in this terrifying predicament. With only the very low light of his lighter and mobile phone left for him, Paul must find a way out before time runs out. The unrelenting claustrophobia is evident from the start. The scarceness of oxygen is palpable amongst the audience as much as it is Paul, such is the films effect. You can feel the scratchy sand on your face and feel the walls closing in as time is running out. Kudos must be payed to Cortés for mining the concept for all its worth. He wrings plenty of ingenious camera angles and tense obstacles out of our heroes 'situation'. How the film never once grows dull or outstays its welcome is a huge success for Cortés and his team. Sound design is fantastic adding to the nerve shredding terror along with one of the best scores of the year, enhancing the excitement and tension.

However, a film like this would live or die on its central actor. It is he who the audience spends every second with and were they not up the task, the film would feel considerably longer than its 90 or so minutes. While casting someone like Ryan Reynolds in this part might initially seem disjointing, it is all the more stunning at how well he pulls it off. An actor known more for his looks and his razor sharp timing and moter mouth skills; a film like this goes almost entirely against image by casting him in dark shadows and having him react to anonymous voices on the end of his phone for much of its running time. Reynolds never once fails to captivate. It shows plenty of more strings to his bow and if there is any justice, Reynolds will be nominated come the awards season.

Cortés may be trying to make a statement with his film. The maddening ineffectiveness of those Paul turns to for help casts a damning eye over the American Government and murky Political implications of the Iraq war. Thankfully he does not let this over-power the story, rather aide and move it along. However, if his intentions were in showing the dark side of those in charge of helping American soldiers and workers in Iraq, then why paint the Iraqis themselves as such psychotic individuals. A minor criticism in an otherwise expertly maintained and stunning thriller. Reynolds gives an incredible one man performance and Cortés mounts a very claustrophobic yet very exciting small space for our hero to escape from. Along with a delicious sense of dark humour, all involved turn in one of the most memorable films of the year.

Verdict 82%

A Hitchcockian thriller that the man himself would have been proud to put his name on, Rodrigo Cortés takes its very simple premise to its extremes and delivers a fantastic cinematic experience.

"Buried" Trailer

The Town

Ben Affleck has made a startling career transformation in a mere seven years. It was 2003 in which "Gigli" was released, an International box office flop that had Affleck rendered a laughing stock. Parody was everywhere; with Affleck it was just too easy and like shooting fish in a barrel. That career low, coupled with his disastrous marriage to Jennifer Lopez almost left his career in tatters. Stunning then that in just two films, Affleck has completely turned his fortunes around. No longer do people wonder how much more talented his original writing partner Matt Damon is, or if Affleck ever even had any input into "Good Will Hunting"? Now his name is a byword for smart and intelligent adult dramas that are actually entertaining movie fodder for a Saturday night. He entertains the masses, but does not ask them to switch off their brain to do so. He respects character and plotting and does not shy away from harsh or gritty themes. All this, from that guy in "Reindeer Games".

Affleck again returns to the seedy underbelly of his hometown of Boston. In his previous film, ''Gone Baby Gone'' he presented very unsavory characters that would sell their own child for drugs or money. He depicted just how tough the streets are and how easy it is to get lost in their moral murkiness. With ''The Town'', he presents us with 'Charlestown'', a small neighbourhood in the Boston locale, which we're told houses most of the criminals responsible for the 300 or so bank robberies committed there every year. It is here that we open on Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck), as he and his team rob a bank. Affleck shows his progression as a filmaker from the off, as this expertly mounted and brilliantly planned heist, is echoed in Afflecks Directing skills. In fact each of the three or so major action scenes are all brilliantly orchestrated. Events are feverous and hectic but never do the audience lose track of what is happening on screen. Its shoot-outs in particular rank as some of the best I have seen in years. As MacRay and his team take hostage Claire, (Rebecca Hall), a young bank teller, MacRay then takes it on himself to keep tabs on her, to make sure she does not give away any details she may have witnessed about MacRay and his masked group, to Special Agent Adam Frawley (Jon Hamm). As Doug and Claires relationship begins to grow, Doug soon realises that this may not be the life for him after all. But with the screws tightening from the FBI closing in and tension within the group itself, will he actually be able to make it out of Charlestown alive?

The ensemble cast are all superb. Affleck knows talented actors and litters his film with them. Hamm continues his role to superstardom as the very cunning and calculating Special Agent. In one scene in particular he jumps from slyly charming, to steel and beady eyed malice in a heartbeat. However Affleck does not drown his film with out and out bad guys. Characters here carry shades of grey to them. So while Frawley may be the antagonist, he is not all bad. Only Postlethwaite carries any of the panto 'boo and hiss' trappings of his villainous turn. Possibly the best performance of the film belongs to Renner as Jem, Dougs best friend. Exhibiting all the intensity that got him an Oscar nomination for ''The Hurt Locker'', his role provides a lot of the tension and emotion. A pent up ball of fury that may erupt at any time, his most heart stopping and stand out moment comes when he accidentally stumbles upon Doug and Claire on a date. His is a character borne out of his tough upbringing. Violence is all he knows and is the only way he knows how to express himself. He may not exhibit the remorse Doug has for his actions, but there is still something entirely sympathetic about him. A product of a rough and rotten upbringing, his downfall began at a young age when he killed another kid because he 'didn't like the look of him'. Under Renner's skilled wing, Jem isn't just the homicidal maniacal caricature he could easily have been, but something far more more sad and layered. Tension in the group comes from him at heart feeling threatened by Halls character. He doesn't want to lose his buddy and half brother and on these streets, family is everything. So when Doug tells him how he's 'getting out', what else can Jem do but fight? He is nothing outside of Charlestown and the prospect of existing in a world outside of it is too scary. Jealousy stems from Dougs ability to at least try to leave, something Jem could never do.

And then there is Affleck the actor. While this is undoubtably the best he has been in years, it is still outmatched by his skills behind the camera. One of the biggest strengths is the films ability to still seem fresh and entertaining when the the plot and themes are anything but. Boston crime in film is so common now, it could form a sub-genre onto itself. With Afflecks previous film, ''Gone Baby Gone'', it is also joined by ''Mystic River'' and ''The Departed'' in the familial stakes. That the film also shares parallel themes with the 1995 classic ''Heat'' and ''Point Break'', shows that Affleck is hardly treading on new ground here. It is this which while is certainly a big plus, it also means the film is prevented from 'classic' status. Events here have been covered plenty of times before and the film will offer you nothing new in the way of crime thrillers. It will however, offer a very solid and exciting evenings entertainment with some of the best ensemble acting in recent memory. Affleck should be applauded for making films for adults once again, and the films strong showings in both the US and Europe show that they are more than ready for films that don't have to rely on special effects to be a commercial hit. That Affleck has also changed the publics perception of his talent is astounding in itself. Tell anyone walking out of ''Forces of Nature'', that that actor will be writing and directing some of the finest and mature films appearing in cinemas in 10 years from now and they might have been liable to laugh in your face. In fact, I might have too.

Verdict: 79%

Ben Affleck cements his new found reputation as a very talented Director, with this expertly crafted and exciting crime drama. He builds on his Directing skills while also providing a more than solid nights entertainment. Expect to see this nominated for its outstanding cast come the awards season.

''The Town'' Trailer

Cyrus

I know it is the best interests for distributers to sell a film in the very best way they know how. At the end of the day, they want to get bums on seats, regardless of how they got them there in the first place. There has been plenty of intentionally misleading trailers over the years. Recent examples like the addition of far more alien laser sights fixed on Adrien Brody's torso in the "Predators" trailer and non stop and mindless horror thrills promised from the trailer to "The Last Exorcism" are two that immediately spring to mind. People who are forking their hard earned cash over to sit in a darkened room for two hours want to know exactly what they are getting, and more often than not, these misleading promos can usually do more harm than good. Why tell audiences that the thing that they may have paid to see the film in the first place is not there at all. It is frustrating on the audiences part and the feeling of being cheated can do nothing but harm the original films chances to do what it was originally made to do in the first place. "Predators" only had three aliens, not the multiple foes as promised in the trailer, but I still didn't let it bother me as it still proved to be entertaining in its own right. "The Last Exorcism" turned out to actually be quite a clever character study and offered more in the way (until that disastrous finale) than usual horrors have been giving us recently. That the film was actually ruined by loud and obnoxious members of the audience too impatient to sit through the subtle character details, and (very loudly) voicing their thoughts on the horror that may be in store for them only left me livid and intent on not enjoying the final film on its own terms; rather why it provoked the audience to react like this, and hence why the film was not reviewed here. That this happened to me again the following week when I sat down to "Cyrus" only provoked questions of why these distributers seem intent on harming their (sometimes very precious) films chances for finding its audience. Sure, they have to get an audience in the first place, but when it comes from such a misleading direction, prompts question of when does it change from 'selling' to 'lying' to the audience? That all these examples are very fine films in their own right begs the question; why compensate for something that isn't there? Have more faith in your film, and it will find its true audience if it is good enough. Which then brings me to this review.

Initial trailers for "Cyrus" promised a raucous indie comedy. Shades of infant, silly humour reminiscent of "Step Brothers" seemed apparant, mixed with a healthy dose of indie sensibilities so as to balance out the mad cap comedy on display. That it also featured Jonah Hill and recent comedy graduate John C. Reilly only perpetuated this. How strange it was then, to sit down and find that this was not the comedy with some occasional drama as expected; more so, a drama sprinkled with a few choice moments of humour here and there. The result as I was watching was while not disliking the film, I found myself irritated at my own preconceived notions. I believed I always let a film play on its own terms no matter what, and yet here I was, not doing so. I wanted and expected a comedy. If I had been sold the very decent and quite original drama that it is, I could have enjoyed the film more. Advertising took away from the film. This is all the more regrettable as the film is a very enjoyable one indeed. I may perhaps review this again on its own terms soon, but as for now, I am only left with my feelings as I walked out of the theatre.

John C. Reilly is John, a 40 something divocee. He still spends more time than is healthy with his ex and is seemingly unwilling to get over her. That mixed with his very lonely existence seems to be taking over his life. Imagine then his good fortune, when he meets Molly, played by Marisa Tomei. The two strike up a relationship and John believes his luck is finally changing as he finds himself, for once in a very long time, happy. This all changes however when he is introduced to Cyrus, Molly's 20-something grown son played by Hill, who immediately takes a dislike to John. The two butt heads over their affection (and in Cyrus' case, quite unhealthily so) for Molly. While this provides moments of quiet, subtle humour, focus is primarily kept on its quirky characters. There are no laugh out loud set pieces here. As befitting a cast this talented, everyone delivers knock out performances. It's been a while since Reilly has delivered a role this nuanced and reminded me of what a talented character actor he was and still continues to be. While excelling at his more recent and broader comedy output, it's refreshing to see he hasn't lost his dramatic sensibilities. Marisa Tomei continues her late career transformation into a very worthy actress, although some more character detail would be welcome for Molly (is she unaware of how unhealthy her relationship with Cyrus has become?). Catherine Keener has it in her contract to appear in every indie film ever and again gives a nice little performance. However, it is Jonah Hill who surprises the most. Previously seen very loudly spouting crude lines of dialogue for Judd Apatow, here he plays Cyrus with some very refreshing depth and respect for his character. Underneath that quite calm exterior, there is a wealth of aggression and emotion that he does not seem to be able to grasp onto. He expects and wishes everyone to treat him like an adult, and yet it seem he is still finding it hard to mature to one. This results in some very awkward conversations with John and what has to be, in this year anyway, the most cringe inducing dinner scene in recent memory. Siblings, The Duplass Brothers helmed proceedings and they inject some very real observations on human behaviour. This comes from their 'mumblecore' past, but giving the actors the scene and letting them improvise around it results in some very real moments. Of course this could have resulted in disaster, but letting the actors find their characters as opposed to being told what they are, is very refreshing. The only problem with this, is that giving the actors such free reign means that the film isn't especially good looking. Shaky hand held camera, mixed with frequent zooms means that while it adds to the realism, it hardly makes the film shine.

However, this brings me back to my minor quibbles with the film. The film is very well acted, and offers some very memorable characters and situations, but is not what I was expecting. These feelings were not to be put to rest as tension rose in the audience as they kept on expecting belly laughs that never came. The feeling became palpable among us. Cyrus has some very uncomfortable oedipal like tendencies to deal with, and it is a very unassuming and lonely man who is on the receiving end of his inability to deal with his emotions. While far from bleak or draining, it just isn't what most mainstream audiences will want to see. Which is fine, but why invite them in the first place?

Verdict: 66%

A very original and excellantly acted study of conflicting relationships. The film knows what it is and does it very well, just don't go in and expect the laugh riot as what was initially suggested.

"Cyrus" Trailer

Trailer - "The Fighter"

From the looks of it, this film seems to be the very definition of cliche. The underdog triumphing. It has been seen countless times before and seems completely shameless in its Oscar attention-grabbing. And usually films like this hold very little appeal for me, but right now a film like this seems to be what everybody needs. There is enough economic depression to send anyone into a slump, so a film about overcoming insurmountable odds to achieve what you want in life is a welcome sight, for me at least. Wahlberg ("Boogie Nights" aside) has never been the lead in a decent film but it all looks set to change here and Bale is delivering another method style performance reminiscent of the days before he donned the black cape. And at the very least, Director David O. Russel ("Three Kings" "I ♥ Huckabees") knows how deliver appararantly predictable and normal stories with anything but predictable results. The film is released in December this year.

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World

'Geek Chic', 'Hipster Cool' and 'Style Over Substance'. There were times during this film, especially near the start, when I feared that all of these things were threatening to drown it out. The film walks a very fine line in almost letting its ADD visuals and 'oh so cool and hip' sensibilities from overtaking everything. As it stands however, I can safely say, that "Scott Pilgrim" is easily one of the best films of the year and quite unlike almost any other film I have seen. Edgar Wright must have had serious confidence in the comic the film is originally based on. I mean, there are moments when the film is going absolutely bonkers on screen. How he was let away by Universal with such authorship over the film is astonishing. When that first fight happens, it will make or break it for most people. Before now, the film was coasting along nicely, obviously existing in its own universe, but nothing too outlandish has happened. But when the action kicks in, it is incredibly jolting. Wright has faith in his audience and his source material, and God knows he has the talent, because there is absolutely no other Director out there today that could pull off a film like this. It is the result of a computer game and indie/rock music mashed together; it is youth and vitality put up on screen; it makes your own humdrum life exciting and fantastical, because you can relate to Scott's outlook so easily. Everyone daydreams and adds in their own 'movie like' features into their own life all the time. Everyone has their life soundtracked by their own favourite bands. Everyone lets their favourite TV Shows influence their outlook on everything far easier than even their own family. Everyone wishes they could stand up and fight for what they believe in no matter what. Put simply, we all live our life in our head, as does the title character of the film. No doubt our life is not nearly as exciting as we aspire it to be, much like the eponymous character. But that wouldn't exactly make for the awe inducing cinema on display here would it?

Scott Pilgrim is a regular 22 year old slacker. He plays bass in a band, loves video games and falls in love easily. Too easily it would seem. Initially going out with 17 year old high school student Knives Chau, his head turns when he meets Ramona Flowers, the girl of his dreams. However, in order to win her heart, he must first defeat all of her 7 evil exes in 7 fights to the death. Michael Cera has many of his critics. While initially being acclaimed for his comic timing and his predilection for awkward and uncomfortable comedy moments on the now classic ''Arrested Development'' TV Show, he was then accused by many as coasting by on those sensibilities for too long. He was a one trick pony they said. Perhaps those are too hard on Cera, as no one seems to be more aware of this trait, than himself. Earlier this year he proved he can do more than 'nice and nerdy' with ''Youth In Revolt'' and now with this, he proves himself to be quite an adept actor and not only in the physical department. With the fact that Wright turned Simon Pegg into an action star in "Hot Fuzz", it will not surprise anybody that Cera convincingly kicks plenty of ass throughout 'Pilgrim'. However, what is surprising is that he is no longer playing Cera, or a shade of him anymore. Yes, Pilgrim is a dork and a dweeb; he puts his foot in his mouth and sometimes stammers uncomfortably and shyly over sentences, but Pilgrim is a different character altogether than anything we have seen from Cera. At turns fickle, moany, and arguably unsympathetic, he is in many regards, the most real part that Cera has portrayed. It is down to his talent that we stay on Pilgrims side throughout and he doesn't become irritating for the audience. He is also lovable, winningly goofy and relatable. Cera is ably supported by a fantastic supporting cast. Winstead carefully sidesteps being just a dream girl to shows layers beneath that 'too good to be true' caricature that Pilgrim paints of her. Chris Evans and Brandon Routh both hilariously convince as just 2 of those previous and very egotistical exes Pilgrim has to contend with. Mae Whitman turns up too, reuniting her with her ''Arrested Development'' co-star Cera. Kieran Culkin impresses as Scotts gay room mate Wallace, and is hilariously sardonic towards the lovelorn Scott. It is arguably all seen from Scotts perspective in his head, but the film is hardly just about him. Part of what makes the film are the supporting players whether they be part of his band 'Sex-Bob-omb', or attempting to kick his ass for the hand of the one he loves.

There is no reason given for the superhuman tendencies characters have here. Look at the film as being set in a different universe to our own, look at it as being seen through Scotts eyes, look at it as being a metaphor for coming to terms with the one you love's past. Whatever viewpoint you decide upon, nothing can quite prepare you for what Wright puts up on screen. He doesn't ease viewers into it; this is his world, like it or loathe it. When the first evil ex starts bellowing out a Bollywood style song and dance, some simply won't want to go along with the Directors sensibilities so disjointing is it. The film is after all a (deep breath) action-romance-comedy-musical. And you thought ''Shawn of the Dead''s 'rom-zom-com' was ambitious? Wrights film simply bubbles over with colour and life and fervour. It literally is far too much to take in at once. It might be easier at the start to characterise the film as a hipsters wet dream, but there is far too much imagination, wit and originality going on display here to so easily dismiss. How Wright manages to keep to movie on the rails is beyond me, but he passes with flying colours. Action scenes are fantastically staged and choreographed, with each battle getting a firm and separate distinct personality from the last. Events do not become tiring despite the fact that there are 7 epic fights to get through; Wrights pacing is impeccable. The film never once stops to take in breath or to let you digest proceedings and it is all over before you can truly take in what you have witnessed. We all knew Wright was talented before, but the staggering amount of split screens, zooms and camera tricks he throws at the audience is astonishing. All are carefully thought out, and not just of the 'see what trick will stick' variety. For a Director as visually gifted, he is also in great possession of keen writing. This is what lends ''Scott Pilgrim'' its heart and vitality; without this, the film would just be a whirlwind of colour all jumbled incoherently together.

''Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World'' could be argued as being rock music personified on film. The picture both knowingly, yet lovingly mocks its indie core audience. 'We are Sex-Bob-omb', one the characters tells his audience, 'we're here to make you think about death and make you sad and stuff'. Another rival bands song lasts only a few seconds with a screaming declaration of being 'so sad'. It laughs at itself and the audience, and the audience laughs right back. Yet music is in the films bones. Fellow Canucks 'Broken Social Scene', 'Plumtree' and 'Metric' all feature heavily, while Beck and his band performed and wrote all the Sex-Bob-omb tracks featured. The result is everything you could want from a film. It makes you fall in love with your friends, your music and those that you hold dearest all over again. It positively jumps out of the screen and grabs you, shaking you to life. A cinematic headrush of colour, humour and music, Edgar Wright yet again outdoes himself. This is a film for right now and hopefully where you are in your life and depending on your age you will get it, and admire it for everything that it is. If there is a more stunningly original vision this year, I'll burst into coins.

Verdict 85%

Edgar Wright confirms his position as one of the most exciting young film makers around, while Cera shows there is more to him than meets the eye. The cast do fantastic work and the music is all top notch. All this combined with the most humorous action you may see all year adds up to a huge cult classic in the making. Ignore the tepid Stateside response, see the film, fall in love with it and see it again.

"Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" Trailer

"Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World" OST

In a soundtrack chocked full of gems, here is but one cut from it. Originally written by the excellent Canadian band 'Metric', it is performed by Scott's ex-girlfriend in the film. The entire soundtrack is very much recommended, as those who have seen the film will attest to.