Submarine

Richard Ayoade has been threatening to break into cinema for a while now. Some may not think they initially know the name, but the man has slowly and surely been working his way up through the ranks for the best part of the last decade to this point. That's not to say "Submarine" was always part of the plan. Rather, it feels more of a natural progression of the mans talents. So while most will know him from his work as Moss on Channel 4s "The IT Crowd", Ayoades interests go far deeper than seen there. While as intentionally broad as the character he so well plays is, Ayoade has far more original sensibilities. From his work directing and writing "Garth Merenghi's Darkplace", one of the most hilarious and unique TV shows to grace our screens, he has also directed music videos for bands such as Kasabian, Arctic Monkeys, Vampire Weekend, Yeah Yeah Yeahs and The Last Shadow Puppets. From those he honed a unique visual style as well as gaining a working friendship with Alex Turner, singer of both the Arctic Monkeys and Last Shadow Puppets. Incidentally Turner contributes some solo material for the soundtrack on "Submarine". Put simply, whether it be acting, writing or directing Ayoade showed a unique flair for it. Fans waited with baited breath to see what his debut would be. Some expected the indie cool sheen he brought to his music videos. Others expected the intentionally shoddy and gut bustingly hilarious comedy of "Darkplace". Most will be surprised to find that it is neither of the two, rather something altogether more soulful and deep. While still managing to retain his finger prints "Submarine" has turned out to be one of the most original films this year and one of the most exciting debut films from a British film maker in quite some time.

Oliver Tate (Craig Roberts) is a socially awkward, yet outwardly confident sixteen year old. He could be considered pretentious were he not so brash. Set in the 80's, the film follows Oliver as he struggles to maintain a relationship with the pyromaniac girl of his dreams Jordana (Yasmin Paige) while trying to keep his parents (Noah Taylor and Sally Hawkins) crumbling marriage together. While frequently hilarious, the film has a streak of melancholy running through it. Characters here live lives of sadness (almost wilingly so) and it is through this that Oliver finds his voice. Due to a love of French New Wave cinema and his self belief in being a great litery genius, Oliver views himself and his life as what we see on screen. This could make the protagonist very self-aggrandising to the audience yet Roberts makes sure that Oliver is never less than captivating throughout. His self assured belief in himself is where the film finds most of its understated humour. Lines like 'I suppose it may be affectation, but I sometimes like to read the dictionary', further add to the pomposity of his character. And yet, for all his flaws, Olivers heart is in the right place. Sure some of his methods are sometimes morally questionable, but it is only because he wants those he loves to be happy. At the center, his relationship with his parents and they, with each other, is what manifests itself into his relationship with Jordana. If they can't be happy, then what chance does he and his new would be girlfriend have? Both Noah Taylor and Sally Hawkins are wonderful as Olivers parents. Their marraige on the rocks is not one of heated arguments and intense fireworks, rather of quiet and muted restrain. How much does Taylor want to fight for his wife. How much does Hawins want him to fight for her. You get the feeling that these people are far too self absorbed in themselves to ever truly get the urge to fight for what they want. And yet Oliver seems to be the only one who is doing that. This makes later actions more understandable and effective (although not necessarily condonable). The cast are all uniformly brilliant. For such young actors both Roberts and Paige both have stunning grasps on their characters. As the film progresses, the oddity of their relationship is always grounded by their performances. The always great Paddy Considine also shows up as the heavily mulleted stage psychic who shows an unhealthy interest in Olivers mother.

Now by no means is this film perfect. It gets bogged down in its mournfulness more than once and is sometimes too quirky for its own good. But stick with it and the results will be rewarding. Comparisons are there to be made to Wes Anderson, but with a character like Oliver narrating events, how else could it look? Dialogue is constantly at odds with normal narrative convention. Events don't always go where you might expect. Instead of the fantastic and very romantic night Oliver has planned with Jordana, he is instead met with 'Christ, you're a serial killer' from her. Ayoade has crafted a smart and very witty debut, but what is most exciting is to see where this talent will go next. With each move he makes he takes great strides in his abilities, so it would not be unfair to assume that Ayoade is on the cusp of some very special things indeed. With "Submarine" he has crafted merely something very good and for now, and that is more than enough.

Verdict: 7/10

A very funny and touching coming of age story. All the actors are brilliant and Ayoade shows a unique visual flair behind the camera. It's sometimes stale idiosyncrasies threaten to over shadow proceedings, but the film is rich, subtle, unique and very rewarding. This is one that will only grow stronger with time I imagine.

"Submarine" Trailer

Never Let Me Go

There is something irresistibly fresh in the tragic beauty of "Never Let Me Go". It is not often you see a film blend seemingly contradictory genres together and yet this film succeeds admirably. Science fiction and drama are mixed with period detail to create a wonderful and hauntingly subdued film. Possibly not to everyones taste as evidenced by its poor box office in America, it is nonetheless a very worthy cinematic experience. The film paints an alternate dystopian history, and yet for all its subtle sci-fi musings, the film is primarily concerned with romance. Kathy H (a heartbreaking Carey Mulligan) grows up in a boarding school with life long friends Tommy (Andrew Garfield) and Ruth (Keira Knightly). Throughout the years she finds her feelings for Tommy grow while the seemingly jealous and calculating Ruth becomes romantically involved with him first. As the young adults progress we see how their restrictive fate mixed with Kathys eternal unrequited love for Tommy affects their lives. There is a strong sense of tragedy running through the film. The films chief existential questions weigh heavy on our heroine. What does it mean to love? What does it mean to have a soul? The film is not a cheery watch, and yet if you work for for it, its low key charms will soon reveal themselves and linger inside long after the credits have rolled. Director Romanek, known more for his flashy music videos, here uses an effective and simple technique, filtering his rain drenched England through a system of grey and blue hues. Make no mistake, that while the film may sound uneventful and dull, it offers plenty of tantalising questions for the audience to answer. The cast are all uniformly brilliant handling the trio of characters superbly. While some of their actions, especially the initially nefarious Ruth, may seem hard to condone, they are nonetheless understandable. Of course sci-fi as a genre is based on asking big questions and this is no exception. With writer Alex Garland (working from the original novel by Kazuo Ishiguro) it is no surprise that the results are as thought provoking as they are. And yet the film has so much heart running throughout, making its weepy third act all the more effective. The film earns your emotional attachment to it. This is grand intelligent film making on an emotional and engaging level. It's poor showing in the states hopefully might not be the same over here, but it is a very tough and strange film to market. Not many people may initially think they want to see a film like this, but it is more than worth it. Films like this rarely come along and must be treasured when they do, otherwise Hollywood runs the risk of making every science fiction film stuffed with explosions and over sized robots. In a genre chocked full of predictable and stupid trappings, this breathes fresh life into it.

Verdict: 8/10

A haunting and frequently devastating oddity. It blends several genres together, to create an original yet understated thought provoking experience. This deserves to be mentioned with some of the greats come the years end, and its ignoring this awards season is criminal. A very special film.

"Never Let Me Go" Trailer

True Grit

I'm sure even the most hardened Coen Brothers fan had some doubts upon hearing the highly illustrious brothers were considering another remake. After all, the last time they attempted one, was 2004's notorious "The Ladykillers", which along with "Intolerable Cruelty" is regarded as the least favoured in the Coen canon. However the Coens are far too astute to hamper themselves again. Part of me even thinks that they know something about those two films that we don't-after all, they are very noticeable blotches on their otherwise impeccable filmography. The Coens have always done what they meant to, which is part of what makes them such great film makers. Everything in their films is so perfectly judged, that the fact that "The Ladykillers" and "Intolerable Cruelty" are the misfires that they are, makes them stick out even further like a sore thumb. Although some have speculated it's their lack of 'Coen-isms' in the scripts I believe it to be something else. For "True Grit" is yet another fantastic achievement by the brothers, and yet for all its stunning wordplay, and oddball characters, it is as times, not very Coen at all. It is a Western, plain and simple. Delivered without any irony, the audience are transported back to a gritty, rough and unforgiving time. One that while it recalls the epic, silent landscapes and southern grit of "No Country For Old Men" and "Raising Arizona", it finds the brothers on new tides. Not that you'd ever know it; it offers something new to the great Coen pantheon while still more than living up to earlier classics.

Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) is bereaved after the recent and senseless murder of her father. At 14 years old she is head strong, confident, and more than a little vulnerable, but no less capable of taking care of herself. Being all these things and more, she takes it upon herself to capture and bring justice to her fathers murderer, Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin). In order to do this, she hires boozy US Marshall, Rooster Cogburn (a marvelously cantankerous Jeff Bridges), the only man with enough 'true grit' to get the job done. Along the way they meet Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (Matt Damon), a man also out to capture Tom Chaney and bring him back to his native Texan soil. Along with its plot, its characters are completely without fault-something which is the very least you can expect from the brothers Coen. Utilizing its chase movie set-up, they find ample room for quirky observations on the many 'characters' the Wild West had to offer and which are more than a dying breed nowadays. Within its themes of revenge, redemption and everything in between, they also allow the relationship between Mattie and Cogburn to grow. As Mattie, Steinfeld was called upon to do an awful lot. It is she who carries the film and grounds it around the more colourful characterisations of LaBoeuf and Cogburn. At merely 13 years old, she very nearly walks away with the film, so strong is her performance. No mean feat with a cast of this calibre, all of whom fire with all guns blazing. As Laboeuf, Damon gets most of the laughs. A slightly egotistical and proud man, his vanity and pride lend itself to the films funniest moments, especially when the aftermath of one action leaves him with a subtle, yet humourous speech impediment for the rest of the films running time. And completing the trio is Bridges' Cogburn. Much has been made of the John Wayne 1969 original film and the Dukes performance with which he won his only oscar. Here Bridges walks away with the role; in fact it is fair to say he completely dominates it over Wayne and will be remembered as the definitive actor for the part. Through his mumbled, slurred and thickly southern drawl, it is he who gets the film loudest performance and he is a pleasure to watch. His constant butting heads with LaBoeuf is a source of many of the most entertaining moments and his slow warming up to the strong willed Mattie gives the film its heart.

The film is not afraid to be funny when it has to while still retaining its smarts and originality. Every Coens film has wry moments of humour (even the blacker than black "No Country For Old Men") and "True Grit" is no exception. In fact its violence and harshness, is contrasted wonderfully with two of the most humourous characters seen in a Coens film for quite sometime in LaBeouf and Cogburn (a fantastic double act). Bridges' second team up with the brothers after the classic "The Big Lebowski" was always going to deliver, while Josh Brolin delivers in the few scenes he has. However newcomers Hailee Steinfeld, Matt Damon and Barry Pepper fit very comfortably with the Coens sensibilities. Pepper in particular steals the film in his limited screen time, which reminds the viewer of how talented he always was-completely unrecognizable here, he is better than ever before. When it comes down to it, the Coens always cast their films impeccably. When it came to remaking the original, they faced doubting looks not only from their previously burned fans, but from the lovers of the John Wayne classic. Although it shares vaguely the same plot, the Coens stick closer to the original 1968 book it is based on, and it is from where it gets its emotional weight. Dialogue stems from the novel but also shines with the best the brothers have previously offered. In the end with a surprising amount going against them, the brothers turn in their most crowd pleasing, yet no less effective work in some time. What they never forget is that while Bridges may hog the limelight, its title is not about him-it is our heroine Mattie who always had true grit.

Verdict: 9/10

Bridges chews up the scenery and all the supporting cast (especially Pepper) deliver while Steinfeld gives an incredibly assured debut performance belittling her young age. In the end it may be commercial and crowd pleasing but it is no less Coen and their stunning sensibilities linger throughout in Roger Deakins gorgeous images, Carter Burwells heartfelt strings, and their own inimitable and finely tuned dialogue. If this is the Coens selling out, then more of it would be very much welcomed indeed.

"True Grit" Trailer

Rabbit Hole

I feel I may have missed the point of "Rabbit Hole". Upon first hearing about this film (a couple deals with the recent untimely death of their four year old son) I immediately thought 'thanks but no thanks'; as would most normal people. I mean in all honesty, who wants to sit through something so morbid and bleak? Sure, there are opportunities for some nice insights and observations, but is it really worth it to be so thoroughly bummed out? Then I heard a few initial reports on the film. Praise was very high indeed, and even more encouragingly, those previews painted the film as while being very sombre, also filtered through with a nice bit of understated humour. I suddenly became more interested. Sure Nicole Kidmans acting skills disappeared the second she lost the power to emote due to overuse of botox, but this could be her big comeback. Aaron Eckhart is consistantly one of the most underated actors going and with the original writer of the play it's based on, serving as screenwriter here, all pieces were in place for a suitably darkly humourous study of grief. Of course oscars interest in it didn't hurt much either. How disapointed was I then to sit down and find it was exactly the film I didn't want to get. Bleak, morbid, depressing, sad; this is not what I signed up for. Yes, for while "Rabbit Hole" does feature suitably moving performances by the always reliable Eckhart and newcomer Miles Teller, it is completely bogged down in its own gloominess. Nicole Kidman may be better here than she has in quite a while, but that still doesn't disguise the fact that her role screams 'I want an oscar!' and that her characters natural coldness segues into how we emote to her as a person. A few choice moments of humour does not make this any more palatable. As both of our leads handle their grief in different ways; for him an unwise relationship with a fellow grieving Mother, for her, a strange relationship with the teenager responsible for her sons death, we see them gradually fall apart. To be fair director John Cameron Mitchell does good work with the material. A look back on his earlier films of a travelling transgender singer in "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" and the sexual explicitness of "Shortbus" initially might paint him as the one person who should not direct a film of this nature, yet he pulls it off with admirable restraint. In the end the film is nothing but a well intentioned study of grief. Everyone involved puts in good work and Eckhart was robbed of an oscar nomination, but it's just not something I wish to wallow in for the films running time.

Verdict: 63%

I fear I may have missed something here, but while the film is never less than watchable, with some very admirable performances, its heavy handedness casts a too bleak tone on proceedings.

"Rabbit Hole" Trailer

127 Hours

Danny Boyle certainly knows how to put his audiences through the wringer. The reason a lot of his 'happy' endings have the effect they do, is because he knows how to make his audience work for it. Would Rentons declaration to 'choose life' at the end of 'Trainspotting' have been as sweet had we not witnessed the drug dens, the psychotic friends, and hopeless spiraling descent into drug abuse that we did. Would '28 Days Later' have had the same relief in its coda, without going through the loss and breakdown of society and humanity, had we not felt like we had been through it all with our heroes? Would 'Slumdog Millionaire' have been the feelgood film that it was, had we not had to endure child slavery and torture, in a crime ridden India before our two romantic leads could finally be reunited? When Boyle offers a happy ending in his films, not that they're common mind, it is based on his knowledge that the higher the trauma, the higher the catharsis. Put simply, we want the protagonist to pull through in a Danny Boyle film. And now, with '127 Hours', it is no better evidenced. Quite simply, as much a testament to Danny Boyles incredible film making, as it is to the unbelievable true story it is based on; it is the first film of 2011 to be seen here and it's a belter.

In 2003, mountain climber and reckless adventurer Aron Ralston (James Franco) went out hiking in the Blue John Canyon in Utah without telling either friends or family where he was going. Tragedy struck when Ralston accidentally dislodged a boulder in a small canyon, trapping his arm against the rock wall. Left alone and isolated with minimal chance of rescue or survival, Ralston is left to muse on his life, and the choices that led to this point. Now it may initially seem strange for a director as visually gifted and kinetic as Boyle is, to lend his eye to a completely static and lifeless location for the duration of the film. But that is exactly why none other than he could pull off a film like this with such visceral force. The film simply brims over with life, color and energy. While other directors might have played up the very small time limit Ralston had to extricate himself from his nightmare for tense and ultimately more shallow entertainment purposes, Boyle seems more concerned with the existential musings behind it all. As a result, the ordeal cuts that bit more deeper in the viewer, no pun intended. Yes, the ways and means Ralston tries to free himself are incredibly tough and hard to watch, but that is only because Boyle knows the release and absolution must be akin to something the real Ralston went through in order to achieve the desired results. Not that that makes it any easier to endure.

As Ralston, Franco gives the very best performance of his career so far. Spending much of the film on his own, he holds every ounce of our attention. His gift lies in the sheer range he has. Coming from his comedy roots and matinee idol good looks, he has portrayed very different characters across his career. A glance across his CV shows that while there have been attempts at blockbusters and classic leading man status, Francos best roles have been actually more character driven parts. A very solid co-starring role in 'Milk' showed his determination at being considered as a more serious actor, to go along with his more broader comedy output. Here he is a revelation and for once plays to all his strengths. Ralston was reckless bordering on arrogant. His sure positioning of himself as infallible was always going to be his downfall. When the boulder finally gets lodged in its position on top of Ralstons arm, his initial reaction is one of disbelief. That it would be this boulder rather than something altogether more grander that would trap him is unthinkable to him. He will not be beaten by something as insignificant as this. But beaten he is. His cocksure audacity and unflinching confidence soon gives away to anger, and then helplessness. It is only when Ralston can take responsibility for his actions that have led him here that it makes way to acceptance. The dawning when it happens, is just as significant to Ralston as it is the audience. We can't do everything on our own. We need friends and family. We need other people in our life. Otherwise everyday is just surviving. Ralston doesn't want to just survive anymore, he wants to live. The results of this are incredibly emotional for the viewer. Filtered though Franco's fantastic performance, we put ourselves in his place - would we actually be able to do what Ralston did? Of course Ralston was resourceful. Not many regular people would ever find themselves in the predicament that he did. Not that it should ever take Ralstons ordeal to learn what he learned. Through his daydreams and delirious visions, we should always remember to never take anything in life for granted. If anything, the film should be a reminder of that in all of us.

Boyle films the tragic consequences with his typical flair. Events never once become dull or boring. The resolution, when it finally comes is as unbearable as it is unflinching. When it happens, there is almost a sense of relief that this man is finally taking his own survival into his hands, no matter how grotesque to watch it may be. Reports of people fainting at the crucial point on initial screenings are so far unfounded. Not that it would be hard to imagine; Boyle's location is realistically and astutely detailed, despite half of its filming in a studio. The build up is so well defined and depicted that the solution, when it happens is far harder to take than most grand guignol films could ever muster up. And when it's over we are left, not with horror, but with a sense of uplifting fervor. Gain, not loss is what registers. And that is testament to Boyles skill as a filmaker. 2011 has just begun and so far Boyle has delivered one of the sure to be year greats.

Verdict: 84%

Aron Ralstons five day ordeal is given the Danny Boyle treatment. His high benchmark of stunningly edited sequences and soundtracked to a glorious score is again masterfully maintained. As gut wrenching and hard to stomach as it is emotional, the final feeling left with the viewer is in fact, one of incredible elation. James Franco gives a triumphant performance and the film deserves all of its awards and adulation sure to be coming its way.

"127 Hours" Trailer

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

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

Kick-Ass

Matthew Vaughn, welcome to the big time. After two decent attempts and wild genre change in 'Layer Cake' and 'Stardust', he now, with his latest effort finds himself on the speed dial to every studio in Hollywood. Quite simply, this is a film designed to entertain, thrill, and provoke endless censorship debate in modern cinema. This is a film for the times and one that will be surely be remembered in many years to come as a sure sign of the zeitgeist at the early 2010's. And with it, Vaughn has sealed his place in A-List Directors to watch out for. Here he directs with such confidence and flair, you wonder why you haven't noticed it before in his movies. This is down to one major reason I believe. Vaughn funded 'Kick-Ass' independently thus alleviating himself from the constant strain of over bearing studios breathing down his neck. Incidentally, he ended up selling the film back to Universal for more than he initially asked from them to make it in the first place. As a result, he made the film on his terms and on every frame does this show. Where else would you see a foul mouthed 11 year old girl-assassin lay waste to a room full of drug dealers? As is befitting its source material, (the 2008 comic book series written by Mark Miller) the film pulls absolutely no punches. It is quite possibly, the most fun you might have in a darkened room full of strangers this year.

Dave Lizewski is an everyday normal teenager. Painfully normal. His humdrum boring existence (not to mention, a love of all things comic-book related) leads him to wonder why real life people don't don spandex and become vigilantes on the streets in the name of Superheroes everywhere. 'Because they would get their ass kicked', retorts one of his friends. Aside from this being true, this does not sway Dave and soon he is patrolling the streets and attempting to stop muggings and every day street violence in his own, E-Bay bought costume. It turns out Daves friend was right. Dave does certainly get his ass kicked. It's not long however before Dave makes a name for himself online as his Superhero alter ego Kick-Ass. This leads to a few copycat vigilantes in the name of Big Daddy (Nicholas Cage) and his daughter, Hit-Girl (Chloe Moretz). The difference here, is that these two are the real deal. They are the closest things to Superheroes the film has, albeit completely bat-shit crazy. While Kick-Ass has his sights on small time gang crime, the other two have their crosshairs set on Gangster Kingpin Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong)and it is in this that Kick-Ass gets involved and way over his head with.

The cast are all uniformly excellent. Without a single false note in it, everyone delivers very memorable work and manages to stand out amongst the mad cap profanity and violence. As the lead protagonist British actor Aaron Johnson handles a very tough job very well. It is in he, that the film must be grounded in order for all the craziness to lead from later. Christopher Mintz-Plasse proves he actually isn't the one note McLovin everyone had him initially pegged for as the (again, useless) Superhero Red Mist. Strong, playing the bad guy is going to get tiring quite soon as he has done it so many times before already, however here he is a very formidable threat to our heroes. And then there is Cage and Moretz, the movies secret weapons. Cage here is having a ball and seems to be having the most fun he's had in years. It is easily the best performance he has given in a very long time. Whether he is taking out an entire warehouse of goons or imitating Adam West (Big Daddy's costume bears a striking resemblance to one caped crusader) Cage excels in all his scenes. It might still be a while for him to crawl his credibility back, but on evidence here, it seems that all is certainly not lost from him. And now for Moretz. The character that will define the film for years and the one in which everyone will be talking about as they exit the cinema; she is a giddy riot. Whether spewing out filthy obscenities or mercilessly and fluidly taking out perps, Moretz proves she is now a name to watch out for. Her headline grabbing turn as Hit-Girl is sure enough going to have newspapers spewing out controversy over the moral deviance Vaughn has created by having a character like this in his film. She kills with no remorse, and is the most exciting thing in the films many excellent set pieces. An empowering female role to be proud of, she beats everyone to a pulp and is the strongest character in the film. She recalls the initial impact of originally seeing both Jodie Foster in 'Taxi Driver' and Natalie Portman in 'Leon' such is her impact. Moretz nails it, being at turns hilarious, threatening and tough while reminding the audience that she is only an 11 year old girl all the time.

With all this madness everywhere, a lesser director might have got lost in the mix. Not so Vaughn. This is a very ballsy movie in quite some time and both Vaughn and co-writer Jane Goldsman should be applauded in their adaptation. The film is hilarious. It lampoons comic book movies while simultaneously being one. An off-the-wall 'Watchmen' if you will. It plays completely on its own terms and if you don't want to go along with it, then get out of its way. It is the ultimate fan boy movie writ large. Sure, the script, despite building excellently and being razor sharp does include a few small formulaic details here and there. I say put them aside; the film is there merely to entertain you, and is original in more than enough different ways to keep you watching. When something is so unabashedly crowd pleasing as this, you would be a fool not to go along with it as it breathes new life into the Superhero genre. It is violent and very morally questionable at times, but it's also a 'movie'. Are you really going to take something in which an 11 year old can kick the crap out of men twice her age as serious as that? Make no mistake, while it starts off as proclaiming a need for a Superhero in the 'real world', it is very much set in a 'movies' world. Vaughn as it turns out can have his cake and eat it. A sophisticated and funny satire of the genre yes, but also packed with enough action to keep everyone happy, lest those themes go over some peoples heads. Kudos also to John Murphy, for delivering another nuanced score to go with the picture, and Vaughn himself packing the movie with enough already known pop hits to rattle along to all the carnage. This is the 'Pulp Fiction' of comic book movies. It takes stale conventions and turns them on their heads. It is original when it needs to be, yet is wise enough to play to audience demands for entertainment.

The film is the definition of crowd pleasing. If it is possible, make sure and catch the movie with a group of mates or in a crowded theater to get the most out its charms. Laugh along to the jokes, cheer and whoop the violence (in all its comic, bloody glory) and wince as everybody at some stage gets their ass kicked. Our eponymous hero, lets not forget, is a crap Superhero after all and Vaughn gets great pleasure in repeatedly beating him to a pulp. So throw your morals out the window and go along with the fun this movie has to offer. It isn't going to win any awards, but I have the feeling that this will be remembered very fondly in many years to come. As for Matthew Vaughn, we intriguingly look on to see where he takes us next. After gritty, cockney gangsters, tongue in cheek fantasy and now, morally questionable and gun toting Superheroes, the sky is the limit.

Verdict: 79%

An hilarious script, genuinely exciting action, original characters and lots of violence added together a great movie makes. The true hero here is Vaughn who takes a very combustible concept and makes a classic, knowing comic book movie for the ages.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oy4IFvH2Tc

Shutter Island

After 20 feature films, one of cinemas most respected and esteemed directors is back. Leonardo DiCaprio, on his 4th collaboration with the man says, ‘that in thousands of years, people studying film will look back on a name that has become synonymous with it.’ That name is Martin Scorsese. Simply put, he is possibly the greatest living director still working today. Although he has directed a variety of seminal films and documentaries, it is with perhaps the gangster genre he is most readily identified with. However, looking closer there is perhaps a more relavant theme throughout his works. And that theme is just how fragile the mind is. This is perhaps none more relevant than in his 21st offering here.

Adapted from the novel by Dennis Lehane (writer of ‘Mystic River’ and ‘Gone Baby Gone’) ‘Shutter Island’ is an intense and sometimes devastating journey inside the fractured psychosis of the human mind. Set in the mid 50’s it centres on DiCaprio’s US Marshall, Teddy Daniels’ investigation into the case of a missing patient on an island, housing dangerous psychopaths and criminals. No one here is prepared to talk and both Daniels and his new partner Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) can find no allibies. To make matters worse Head Psychiatrist, Dr Cawley (Ben Kinglsey) and almost everyone else on the island seem to be covering up potential information and housing some dark secrets….. To reveal more about the plot would do a great disservice to both DiCaprio and Scorsese, not to mention screenwriter Laeta Kalogridis for expertly weaving an intense psychological thriller.

What I can say, is that with every collaboration Scorsese and DiCaprio seem to be besting their last, and this is no exception. From DiCaprios performance here, it is easy to see why he has become Scosese’s new muse. It is quite possibly his best performance to date; one that balances raw anger, heartbreaking emotion and sanity loss - sometimes all at once and you may not even know what he’s actually doing for most of the films running time. It’s very courageous on his behalf. Why Paramount moved the picture outside of the Oscar nominations is anyones guess-in a perfect world, DiCaprio would have been walking home with the little gold man on March 7th. Partly in fact why the movie succeeds as well as it does is down to its cast. As mentioned, DiCaprio yet again excels, but is joined ably by Ruffalo, who while not at first seems to be doing much, is in fact housing far more complex emotions and nuances in his performance. Kingsley as well gives another solid turn which is pretty much to be expected from the ‘Sir’ with almost anything he does these days. Michelle Williams make great use of her limited screen time with one scene in particular that leaves you reeling. Also nice to see genre favourites Ted Levine and John Carroll Lynch popping up, actors who just by their history in similarly themed movies, you can tell that something is not quite right.

This might not be the straight forward exercise in terror as some might have originally hoped from its trailers. No, while there are plenty of deranged inmates to terrorise both DiCaprio and Ruffalo (one dark and nighmarish scene in Block C springs to mind), it is actually the unstable mind and it how it can be the most fragile of all things that Scorsese is interested in. This shares themes with many of the mans movies ranging from ‘Taxi Driver’ all the way up to the recent ‘The Aviator’. So sure, from the outset, this might seem to be new ground for Scorsese, but come the climax, there is no doubt you were in anyone else’s hands but his. Unfortunately, the films climax, while earth shattering in its effectiveness is not as clever as you might have been led to believe and for some might be considered a little cheap. The film can also be quite cold and emotionless for most of its running time. Scorsese employs a radical cutting technique with his editor Thelma Schoonmaker, which harks back to her work on ‘Goodfellas’, ‘The King of Comedy’ and ‘Bringing Out The Dead’. Of course you have to know Scorsese to know that you’re in experienced hands and that all is there for a reason that will eventually pay off. This might not work as well for the less patient viewer. Other problems include the fact that various characters seem to come and go throughout the film, (hello and goodbye Patricia Clarkson and Jackie Earle Haley) although this can be down to the films climax and is therefore debatable. Scorsese has more than enough flair and confidence to keep us watching, though make no mistake, ‘Shutter Island’ deals with some intense and tough themes. Scorsese does not make it easy on the viewer from its many weird dream sequences, fractured editing and plotting that may seem ‘all over the place’ to some.

However, Scorsese delivers a far deeper film than the one I was initially expecting. Robbie Robertson (of The Band) and Scorsese hand picked various previously established score music from various different sources and the effect is stunning-the images and many of the music themes work beautifully together. Cinematographer Robert Richardson also creates a blue hued dystopia-creating some of the most beautiful, and disturbing imagery of Scorsese’s career. So what it may come down to is a basic mystery, thriller. Scorsese and DiCaprio elevate it above its genre confines to the 1st great film of 2010.


Result: 81%
You may not know where it is taking you for most of its running time but by its heart wrenching and devastating climax you will know there is only one master.

Martin Scorsese Career Overview and Film Trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGu9ggNtp0g