Piranha 3-D

It first must be noted that before those sitting high and mighty start sniffing their nose up at this movie, they cannot argue against this: At the very least "Piranha" knows its audience and it plays to it brilliantly. It is a remake about man eating Piranhas set loose on lithe, beautiful bodies during Spring Break. What did you expect? High art, this most certainly is not. What it is however, is the most out and out, rollicking good time you may have at the movies this year. While hardly the first 3D exploitation film, it is certainly the most high profile in recent years, following the dreadful "My Bloody Valentine 3D" released early last year. While that film seemed to have aspirations to knowingly playing to generic and cliche horror conventions, it had a horrible cast, daft set pieces, not an ounce of tension and horrid use of its 3D. "Piranha" on the other hand, not only plays hilariously with its tongue lodged firmly in its cheek, but with actual talent in front and behind the camera. Those who can withstand the copious amounts of blood and ridiculously gratuitous nudity will find a live action cartoon in front of them. Do not take this film for one second seriously; it's cast and director certainly don't. What they do take seriously is entertaining their demographic, something the film does in spades.

It's Spring Break on Lake Victoria, Arizona. Hundreds of students cut loose and go wild here every year. However this is the time that an underground earthquake hits, releasing a large swarm of prehistoric Piranhas from their underground lake. Falling prey first, to a very unfortunate Richard Dreyfuss (in the first of many nods to "Jaws") they then descend on the nubile, party goers on the lake. It's up to a small group of strangers to bond together to escape the snappy jaws of the very vicious fish. One of the small successes of the film is in it's casting. Already mentioned was the very welcome cameo of Dreyfuss, yet there are plenty of other surprises in store. Just seeing Christopher Lloyd back on screen again spouting some fantastic OTT dialogue is enjoyable in its own right. Adding to the 'knowing factor' is including talented comedy actors Adam Scott and one third of 'Human Giant' Paul Scheer. In fact its cast has to be one of the oddest in a while; many average cinemagoers won't understand the simple virtues of seeing seasoned veterans Elizabeth Shue (in her first lead in quite a while), Ving Rhames and the aforementioned Lloyd and Dreyfuss back on screen. Jerry O'Connell hasn't lately been in anything other than what is found in DVD bargain bins, Kelly Brook is hardly a 'serious' actress by anyones standards and the rest of the supporting players are filled out by porn stars. All of this adds to the fun on display and shows Director Aja's intentions from the off. To know these actors is to know perfectly what each character will fulfill. It is shameless in its intentions. Somewhat surprisingly, it's distributers Dimension and The Weinstein Company must have had very little faith in the film. Declining to show the film to critics before the films official release usually screams out 'stinker'. But then a curious thing happened. When the film was released, the film actually received good reviews. Happy that critics seemed to be in on the joke, they immediately greenlit a sequel. This has to be the first time a sequel has been put into development as a result of glowing reviews. The film did not open very successfully in its opening weekend. Probably down to the fact that audiences were not to be aware of the intentionally camp and cheesy tone of the film from its many promotional spots, it is regrettable. It seems that everyone involved got the tone the film was aiming for, apart from those promoting it.

Now as you probably can tell, the film is not plot or character based. It has only two things on its mind: Sex and Violence. And the film offers heavy abundance of both. In fact it spends its first half ogling acres of naked flesh, while then spending the second gleefully and very violently ripping it apart. At its center piece is an admittedly very well choreographed and sustained massacre sequence, as all the Spring breakers run (or is that swim?) afoul of all the vicious underwater carnivores. Aja shoots what resembles "Saving Private Ryan" as a stunningly gory and very literal 'bloodbath'. The lake runs red as decapitations, scalpings and lacerations run rampant. The sheer awesomery of the violence on display is both shocking and hilarious. Credit must go to the great make up effects supplied by KNB, for kitting out an entire lakes worth of amputees and bite victims.

Aja has got a lot of praise over the years. Credited with starting the Extreme French Horror genre in "Haute Tension" he then moved to America to remake a string of forgettable and very po-faced horror flicks. While "Haute Tension" was not the horror masterpiece that many proclaimed it to be, it did show that the Director knew how to handle tension and violence in a picture. He can frame a shot well and knows how to play to demands for the genre in a fresh enough way. I thought his talent was to be dimmed in America, but it seems he has found his feet here. He builds proceedings well enough and handles his cast well. Most impressivily, he seems to be having fun with the material. 3-D is very well handled throughout. The film is after all, an all out and unashamed exploitation picture and Aja relishes in throwing as many bodily functions and objects towards his audience as he can think of. The effect works well in adding to the scream-jump-laugh factor. The creatures themselves are hardly menacing in their CG appearance, but they do the trick and work well on screen. The films revels in its absurdism and gleefully celebrates its debauchery. It is gratuitous in every sense of the word, it has zero brains or originality and it panders to the lowest of the low in its audience demographic, but it is competently made, well acted and most importantly of all, great fun. Audiences do get it wrong sometimes it seems. See it on the big screen with mates and laugh along to the glorious violence and mayhem on display.

Verdict 69%

The definition of a guilty pleasure; this offers mindless, nasty violence and pointless and gratuitous nudity, but I chuckled and laughed throughout. Everyone delivers the ridiculous material with a wink and events are well sustained. The sequel cannot come soon enough. Let's hope they decide against the flying piranhas of James Cameron's original 1981 sequel.

"Piranha" Trailer

The Expendables

You have to hand it to Sylvester Stallone. Now in his mid 60's and not content with fading away into 'where are they now action hero limbo' he has over the past few years, been sustaining not only his own career, but audiences interests. After spending the latter half of the 90's and the first part of this decade in flop after flop, he decided to return to his roots with the franchise that made his name in the first place, ''Rocky Balboa''. A surprising critical and commercial hit, he then followed that up with that other franchise that made him, in ''Rambo''. Now, not content with living out his later years with all his hits and characters gone, he now drums out an action heroes Hall Of Fame extravaganza. Stallone will not be leaving his past anytime soon it seems. For it, Stallone assembles his dream time action Wish List. Actors are known only for their action chops; recent puny 'brains over brawn' types such as Jason Bourne or Bruce Wayne have no place here. If veins are not bulging out of every single muscle on your body, then you are not wanted on this cast list. Stallone Writes and Directs as if he has no concept of the word 'cliche'. But for the many reasons this is one of the clunkiest and cheesiest films of the year, it is also at times, quite entertaining in its own lug headed way.

For many males, this is for them, what ''Sex & The City 2'' was to women. An all out male testosterone fest; simple things like plot or characterisation have absolutely no place here. Not that you would be able to hear any of it over the explosions. Stallone and his crack team of mercenaries for hire seek to overthrow a corrupt general and ex-CIA agent in some small country in South America. An alarming amount of the cast have been languishing in straight to DVD hell for quite some time now. For Lundgren, Austin, Crews and Couture, the prospect of appearing again in a theatrical Summer 'event' movie must have seemed like it was never going to come. After the surprise success of the film in the States, they must be thanking their lucky stars that Stallone remembered them. It does at times feel like it is checking off fan boys desires for fight scenes; Li Vs. Lundgren!!! Stallone Vs. Austin!!! That the acting and dialogue is some of the most grinding in recent memory only adds to it's 80's nostalgic feel. Something tells me Stallone was not intending the piece to be as cliche and irony ridden in its delivery, he just doesn't seem as clever as that. A knowing wink every now and again to the audience could have sold the material a bit better. As it stands, a lot of the film is just bad. Characters reminisce about 'that time in Bosnia' and many (awkward) cuttaways to other team members exist only to show that, hey, all these are just blue collar friends and that these cold blooded killers are just normal people underneath all that muscle and brawn, not to mention, give more screen time to some of the lesser featured Expendables. Sexual tension between them all is palpable but just so some guys in the audience don't get uncomfortable from all that male bonding, Stallone throws in woman troubles for Statham and a corrupt Generals daughter that needs rescuing for himself. While we are on acting it is worth noting that Mickey Rourke actually delivers a very fine monologue about his war experiences. Rourke, in the film as a favour to Stallone, sticks out like a shiny penny. He has acquired genuine acting talent through his many down-trodden years that none of his other team mates could even muster for a second. It is an unexpected scene of emotion in an otherwise extraordinarily loud and very bombastic film.

So with all this focus on the many 'once great action stars' in the film, it surely lives or dies on its spectacle. Stallone goes for broke in many of the scenes here, crowbarring enough gun fights, knife fights, fist fights, car chases and giant plane explosions into the plot as he can muster. Most of these deliver, if only for the fact that the young boy in you will get a small excitement quiver at watching those action heroes you once idolised all those years ago, finally getting another chance to show they still have what it takes, before they are brought out to the pasture. A minor concern is that Stallone shoots things too close, and achieves that dreaded 'what just happened there' bug, that seems to be plaguing most big tent pole releases these days. Somehow, all of these things do not destroy the film going experience. There is at least a sense of fun that was missing from the sometimes too nasty ''Rambo''. After ''The A Team'' and ''The Losers'' we could be forgiven from getting 'action ensemble fatigue', but for the most part this stays entertaining. Events don't run on too long and just simply seeing these guys back on screen is enough to sustain interest. Action is never far away at all times, and it features plenty of bone crunching violence to laugh and wince at. If you're in on the joke then you will certainly get a kick from it. It is best watched through boozy and reminiscent eyes. The boy inside you will not be able to resist.

Verdict: 45%

Weak by almost all standards of judgement, this is pushing the 'so bad its good' category of films. I can't say that it offers much in the way of anything, but I can say that I laughed and whooped along with it. If that sounds like something you might be interested in, then rent next time you and your mates are drinking. If you are a woman, then subtract 20% from the verdict. I look forward to the already announced sequel....

''The Expendables'' Trailer

The A-Team

Let it be noted that anybody walking into "The A-Team" without their brain switched off is bound to detest the 2 very loud hours they have ahead of them. It is dumb, shallow and very far fetched at times. It also is the most out and out 'fun' movie I've seen so far this Summer. Languishing in development hell for years, credit must go to Director Carnahan, for rescuing and giving the script the polish I'm sure it deserved. As far as translations of old TV shows to the screen goes, this film is certainly one of the better ones. In keeping within the original show's giddy and frivolous mood, it is suitably OTT. However most of the films success is down to its cast. It is the one thing that separates it from the other action films. Its leading cast members look as if they are having fun. Their sense of mischief and camaraderie is evident and can be equated in the same way a fit of giggles can spread throughout a group of people. It is quite enjoyable and easy to surrender your charms to this group. If the cast were not as good and did not look as though they weren't enjoying themselves so much, then it would not nearly be as enjoyable as a film this bombastic and overblown has any right to be.

The plot follows the same route as the original TV show. In keeping with its new time setting, the action is switched from the originals Vietnam to the Middle East. After a lengthy pre credits action scene bringing the four together, we are thrust forward to '8 years and 80 missions later'. Events take a turn when the gang are imprisoned for a crime they did not commit and sent to prison. Can they break out and gain vengeance on those responsible, while still clearing their names? As you may or may not have guessed, the plot is almost of no importance other than to string together the many set pieces the film has. If you find yourself paying too much attention you will see huge plot holes, some lackluster villains and non-sensical character arcs. Liam Neeson as the teams leader 'Hannibal Smith' is as level headed and stern as the character calls for. 'Rampage' Jackson takes over the now iconic part of 'BA Baracus' however leaves something to be desired. While perfectly suitable looks wise, he doesn't quite manage to bring enough charisma and personality to the role, on at least not the same level Mr T did, back in the 80's. The two standouts are Bradley Cooper as 'Face' and Sharlto Copley as 'Mad Murdock'. Both have great fun with their characters and could not be a better fit to their 80's counterparts. Cooper elicits easy fun and laughs as the womanising number 2, without making him sleazy or unlikeable. Copley showing again that he is going to be a great success after his breakout in "District 9" last Summer, gains the films most laughs. His insanity and penchant for using fake accents and languages provides some of the films stand out moments. In fact one of the films main problems is that it is almost too eager to get to each beat of action. Scenes of interlinking dialogue and plot cohesion seems like an afterthought, which is a shame, as I would have liked to spend some more time just hanging out with our leads. Jokes come thick and fast and while most are instantly forgettable and hardly belly aching, they add to the films charms.

Director Carnahan knows exactly what the film is and does not try to make it anything that it isn't. The film is very loud and sometimes very clunky, but are you really looking for anything other than a rollicking time when you pay your money over to a film with this title? It strives for fun and for the most part achieves it. Action scenes carry the quick ADD editing that more and more action films seem to be favouring. While there to add to the adrenaline and excitement, most of the time they elicit more of 'what just happened there?' reaction. For the most part the set pieces are fun and offer plenty of explosions for the 13 year old boy inside of you. With this years other 'ensemble team' action films "The Losers" and the forthcoming "The Expendables", the film had a surprising amount of competition on its hands. As one of the better blockbusters this Summer, it won't be memorable or achieve immense runaway critical or commercial success but if a film in which our heroes fly a tank appeals to you, then I certainly recommend checking out this team.

Verdict: 60%

A fun frothy night at the movies which is all its director and cast ever set out for it to be. Incredibly hyperactive and over the top, but its cast gain plenty of charm and provide most of the reasons to the films success.

"The A-Team" Trailer

Retrospective - 'The King of Kong' 2007

Here is something genuinely original, which proves that sometimes, fact can be much more crazier than fiction. One of the most compelling and hilarious documentaries I have seen in recent memory; this is nigh on unmissable stuff for almost anybody. In fact, many of the films scenarios are almost too perfect. I mean, most Hollywood movies don't have plots or characters as compelling as those seen here. It has everything you could want from a film. The underdog everybody is rooting to come through and win in the end, some hilarious supporting players, a compelling story and a great 'boo-hiss' villain. And it's all real. And it's all about middle aged computer game nerds. And despite what you may be thinking, it really is that exciting.

The documentary centers primarily on the titular 'Donkey Kong', arcade video game from the 80's. Except, and despite it being the 21st Century, many people seem caught in a time loop, forever dedicated to their love of retro gaming. And not only that, but competitive retro gaming. It is too easy to call these people nerds. Gaming is what they live for. They are real people and are presented as such. And it is not just those middle aged, speccy man-boys that feature here. Along the way we see an elderly lady competing in the tournament also suggesting that the audience for these old arcade games, while small, are most definately diverse. So this small group are dedicated to their love and in competing for the highest scores and bragging rights. All this is for their passion, not to win money or accolades. They simply want to be recognised among their peers. These organised tournaments feature referees, rules and the chance for the players to 'perform' as it were, to live audiences. Out of the crowds the film follows 2 men, both in their late 30's/early 40's and both hell bent on claiming the highest Donkey Kong score. And this is where the film comes into its own. The casting. This is down to one person particularly: Billy Mitchell. A cocky, self indulgant, heavily mulleted and unintentionally hilarious human, he is the perfect villain for the film. One look and you're already hissing him and yet you cannot tear you eyes away. He has surrounded himself with sycophants who worship him and the very high scores he set for the game (albeit back in the early 80's). As a result his ego is almost as big as his hair. Watching him smugly tour the gamesfloor with his trophy wife at his side, you want to simultaneously smack and laugh at him. This is in stark contrast to Steve Wiebe, our underdog. While Mitchell has been in the gaming eye for decades now, Wiebe is the new pretender. He is ready made with the audience cheering for him from the start. A beautiful family, recently laid off and not to mention his proficiancy in not only video games, but also various sports and musical instruments, he has our affections instantly. He is simply one of those guys who never got his break in life, despite the fact of just how talented he is. Could defeating Mitchell be that success that has eluded him his whole life? The rivalry and competition follows, as well as all those involved play out the next action packed 80 or so minutes. And did I mention, it is all about video games?!

Director Seth Gordon does an excellent job with the story. As stated earlier, Wiebe and Mitchell are both tailer made protagonists for the film, but the fact that it is supported by those involved with the competition adds to the comedy. Most are against Wiebe, and most try their best to put him off in various and dirty ways. This is despite the fact that Wiebe has to constantly prove himself on live gaming runs, while Mitchell gets to send in dubiously edited footage of himself beating the game to receive all the accolades that should be Wiebes. It is reveting and compelling stuff. Mitchell cuts a ridiculous picture of a person. Director Gordon said the real life man was worse than that depicted in the film. His worst moments it seems where left out in order to maintain the light tone of the picture. As it stands, he is unforgettable. He hypocritically changes various phrases and sayings throughout the film to suit him. That hair, that beard, that tie, his pseudo intellectual musings on winning and what it means to be a winner, they are too good to be true.

Unfortunately, it all may just be too good to be true as it turns out. As entertaining as it all is, I kept on getting the feeling that Gordon leisurely edited his way around the story and certain events. Which upon later research, I found to be actually the case. So, while no one is portrayed innacurately, certain events have been played around with, in order to maintain dramatic effect for the picture. Upon seeing just what was changed and tweaked, I personally believe them to be for the benefit of the film, and as such, do not personally hold it against either the film or Director. Your own opinion may differ if you feel the Director and Editor cheated themselves around the 'Documentary' genre. As it stands, I believe a small does of creative license with certain events can mostly benefit the subject, as long as it does not twist and morph facts. Gordon seems to have omitted certain things here and there, but for me, it serves as no purpose leaving them in, other than taking away tension from proceedings. I might feel different on other cases, but for this, I found the small tweaks to be for the benefit of the film.

Overall, here is an incredibly entertaining portrayal of men who refuse to grow up. Yes the film could be presented on a darker note (the fact that family and friends are ignored when the great Wiebe's 'Kong' obsession takes hold, that the rivalry seems to be dominating both mens lives, the 'real' Mitchell) but really, could you take a film about such a subject matter as that serious? Those featured here are completely unaware of how they appear to people, but their love for gaming shines through it all. The various back stabbings, intense rivalries and dirty mind tricks are all played out in such a ridiculous background, you cannot help but laugh. As a result, you grow attached to these people. You understand their thrill at seeing a Donkey Kong 'kill screen' for the first time, but don't have to nessessarily commend it. It's all they have in life. It is their own personal mark on history. Gordon is very focused with proceedings and with such a story on his hands he turns out a very crowd pleasing tale. This story has laughs, tears, tension, action, romance and is more exciting than most Hollywood Blockbusters. It could be viewed in manner of different ways; a metaphor for the Generation X's inability to grow up, modern America's growing obsession with gaming, a critique of the American Dream or as simply an old fashioned David and Goliath story. Take your pick as all work excellently towards the final product.

Verdict: 81%

Gordon delivers a universal story played out in almost pitch perfect fashion. Minor liberties taken with certain events aside, he provides everything a Documentary should, along with what most Fiction films should too, all undercutted to an excellent retro 80's soundtrack. Seek out this 'King' and enjoy, just don't get any ideas to attempt to beat either Mitchell or Wiebe's scores afterwards....

Trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMJZ-_bJKdI

The House of the Devil

As stated elsewhere on this blog, I suggested that the best horror movies are the ones you have to find yourself. As a huge fan of the genre, I began to get extremely disillusioned with it; there were simply not enough good films being made. All these efforts were cynical, studio based gore spectaculars. Cheap enough to make, and yet easy to recuperate costs. They seemed to rely on apparant 'shocking' violence at the expense of tension and terror. Some appallingy used a misguided CGI presence to threaten the protagonist. The art of how to truly scare people was lost. At least so I originally thought. That was until films across the seas started scaring up great attention. In no particular order, foreign films like 'The Orphange', 'Let The Right One In', 'REC' and 'Inside' all bloody terrified me!! They were unpredictable, tense and best of all, genuinely scary. If these films all seemed to do their job, then it had still been a while since I had seen anything American even approaching something remotely creepy. 'Drag Me To Hell', while enormous fun, was the equivalent of a rollercoaster; simply put, it didn't freak me out. Was the American horror movie dead? 29 year old Director Ti West didn't seem to think so.

It was only recently I had seen that 'The House of the Devil' was being released in the UK this week. I myself first saw this a few months ago, and cannot recommend it enough. But before any readers rush out and see it, I feel I must warn you that it is that which is almost unthinkable in this day and age: a slow burning horror! This is almost certainly not going to be to everyones taste, but if you like what I tell you about the film, then definately check it out. This film definately needs attention. It doesn't have big name stars, or any studio marketing behind it, but for any old school horror fans, it is unmissable. The film is set in the early 80's and absolutely revels in it's attention to detail. Director West, uses this as endearing nod to the previous masters of the genre he honours and in no way does this become a cynical tool. Simply put, the film breathes 1980's culture. Whether or not this is in the shamelessly retro freeze frame opening credits, synth based score, or minor object details; (hello block Walkman!) show an unassuming person the film and they would never guess it was made last year. This provides much fun for the viewer, even as the film grows in tension. Unfortunately, a film as small as this cannot benefit from a full round up of the plot. It's a sort of 'the less you know about it, the better movie', so I will give only a small bit away. College student Samantha is low on funds. She can't make rent for the brand new house she has just rented and has barely enough money to eat. So when a babysitting job at a house on the remote outskirts of town comes along, it seems too perfect. Sam urgently accepts it.

As stated earlier the film is incredibly slow burning, in fact some might accuse this film as an hour and a half of nothingness. To do that, is an extreme disservice to the direction and script, not to mention great work of the cast. It is a tiny, and very simple project, but nontheless effective for it. Fans of old 60's, 70's and 80's horror such as 'Rosemary's Baby', 'The Shining', and 'Suspiria' will lap everything up. Those expecting cheap thrills and non stop gore, will not find it here. This film has an excellent build up of tension. A lot of this features lead actress Jocelin Donahue doing not very much at all. West however, offers up nail biting unease with every tiny creak in the floorboard, or flicker of a shadow that you think you may or may not have seen. In fact, West plays the film so that you're not entirely sure if these creepy occurances are not just in Samanthas head-is it just paranoia, or are there some other dark forces at work here? West takes his time to get there, but never once loses sight of the goal: to make the audience as uncomfortable as possible. With so much care and effort on making us scared of what might happen, when the action finally explodes, it can't possibly live up to what we have been tantalisingly teased with for the past hour, as nightmarish as it turns out to be. Those early details of a house thought to be empty are just too relateable and it is conveyed very well here. Donahue and the rest of the small cast do a great job. As mentioned none are particualarly recogniseable from anything, but this adds to the unpredictability of where it all might go. Old cult faves like Dee Wallace and the simply terrifying Tom Noonan pop up along the way to make the ride as creepy as possible.

That the very young West has created a horror film this mature and confidant in itself is very commendable. Many directors his age might have sold out with a 'Saw' movie or two, and it is remarkable that he managed to get his vision of the film made at all, with no studio interference. It marks him out as a talent to watch in the future. In a genre that by it's essance is the almost defination of crowd pleasing, this isn't it. Most of these films thrive on giving the audience what they want, this thrives on keeping it from them, for as long as possible. It's terror comes from a place of no irony as more recent efforts might have been. He simply wants to terrify you. If you have the patience and value your classic horror then you will want to join him for the ride.

Verdict: 79%

A great exercise in a low budget horror throw back to the 80's. Some may argue that not enough happens, but those are missing out on the directors intentions. If you go along with it, prepare for a shaky walk around your house as you turn all your lights on afterwards.....

Trailer: (Warning: Certain Spoilers of scenes and very poor indication of movies themes and plot)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHvSkTDWFfk