48 Hour Film Challenge - Tapped Out

As last year, some mates of mine had a crack at the Sci Fi London 48 Hour Film Challenge. They were given a title, a prop and a line of dialogue... and just 48 hours to write and shoot a short sci fi film that included all three. Here's what they came up with...



Well done, guys - best of luck with the competition!

Movie Review: John Carter

The first rule of Film Club is: you do not talk about Film Club.

You all know the second rule of Film Club.

The third rule of Film Club is... if there's a crap genre movie (sci fi, horror, superhero) that all the critics have ripped to shreds: you will go see it in the hope that "it can't be that bad" and generally walk out saying "actually, it was worse".

When I compiled my list of Worst Movies of 2011, Louise pointed out that I hadn't seen any of them with her; I'd seen them all with Film Club. I replied that it was for her own good. Film Club watch the most awful pieces of dreck with me so that she doesn't have to.

It was with Film Club that I saw Ghost Rider: Spirit Of Vengeance. Solomon Kane. Pandorum, Surrogates and Outlander. The execrable 10,000 BC. And, of course, Green Lantern. So it came as no surprise when Film Club called me up and said "right, for your birthday, we're taking you to see John Carter - on us!" How could I resist?

In case you haven't yet heard, John Carter has already been dubbed "one of the biggest flops in cinema history". It looks set to lose Disney $80+ million. Even Mark Kermode hated it... and Mark Kermode watches even more crap films than Film Club. In short, John Carter was going to be a stinker... what better way to celebrate my 40th?

So, OK, I've set this up nicely, just like an M Knight Shyamalan script. You're all ready for the twist...

The truth is: I didn't think John Carter was all that bad. Oh, it was no classic, but I've seen far worse films over the last 40 years, and far, far worse sci fi films. As cheesy, fx-laden romps go (yes, in 3-bloody-D, obviously) John Carter was still way more enjoyable than any of the films listed above, had far more heart than any of the Star Wars prequels, and was far less bursting with patronising bullshit than Avatar. It had a charismatic leading man, some cute and non-annoying aliens (certainly no Jar Jar Binks), hammy villainy from two decent British thesps who should know better (though both Mark Strong and Dominic West have previous form in the crap genre movies category with Green Lantern and Punisher: War Zone respectively). And, you know what? If it hadn't bombed worse than Hiroshima, I'd have happily let Film Club buy me a ticket to see the sequel they struggled so hard to set up (which now looks a forlorn hope). I really don't see what all the whinging is about. If audiences will happily plunk down their money to watch three dire Transformers films (and, yes, I saw all three with Film Club) then why did everyone have such a problem with John Carter? It was better than Cowboys Vs. Aliens...

Movie Review: Ghost Rider - Spirit of Vengeance

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...

Like most sane moviegoers, I didn't have a great deal of time for the original Ghost Rider movie. OK, it was a stinker. So why, pray tell, did I plunk down my hard earned shekels (well, I.'s hard-earned shekels, since we went on Orange Wednesday and he took pity on my unemployed ass and gave me the GOF of his BO) on the second one? My defence goes thus...

1. I like Ghost Rider. He's one of those Marvel B-listers I've always had a soft spot for even though very few writers seem able to make him work. JM DeMatteis managed it back when I was a kid and Jason Aaron knocked it out of the park recently, but beyond that I can't think of too many other great Ghost Rider stories. The potential is there though, as I discovered while writing this week's Thoughtballoons script based on the character. There's so much can be done with this concept. Sadly, the writers of this movie (mostly David bloody Goyer, Hollywood's go-to guy for bad - and occasionally surprisingly good - superhero movies) preferred to run with a tepid combo of Hellboy, The Omen and The Fast & The Furious... and however exciting you might think that sounds: trust me, you're wrong.

2. I (used to) like Nicholas Cage. And every now and then he makes a film which shows a spark of the manic genius he displayed in Wild At Heart or Bad Lieutenant rather than just SHOUTING ALL THE TIME and ACTING REALLY BADLY. Sadly, this was not to be one of those films. Hey, Nick, if you love Ghost Rider as much as you say you do... why didn't you put some bloody effort in?

3. Idris Elba was in it. I like him a lot. He made the absolute most of an underwritten role and provided a couple of moments of blessed comic relief. Many more were needed. Meanwhile, Ciaran Hinds popped up as the devil. Another hugely talented actor... wasted.

4. The reviews told me this one was much better than the first. They lied.


On the other hand, I can't say the warning signs weren't there. I should have paid more attention to the following...


1. The directors, Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, are most famous for making dumb action movies starring Jason blinkin' Statham. Their style can best be described as "less accomplished Guy Ritchie". I hate Guy Ritchie.

2. It was only possible to watch this movie in 3D. Which is strange as Spirit of Vengeance featured the least gratuitous 3D effects of any pointlessly 3D film I've seen in recent times. In fact, other than the fact I was wearing those stupid glasses so (as usual) my eyes hurt and I couldn't focus on the whole of the screen... at no point was I aware of any 3D effects whatsoever. It was like watching a 2D movie with 3D glasses on. I'd rather have just watched it the way god intended.

3. There was a sequence in which Ghost Rider takes a leak and pisses fire. As if to suggest this might be the highlight of the movie, they even included it in the trailer. It was desperate, humourless and lacking in imagination. Actually, that was pretty representative of the movie as a whole. I take that back: it belonged in the trailer. It should have been the whole trailer. 30 seconds of Ghost Rider weeing. That would have been apt.

Movie Review: Sherlock Homes - A Game Of Shadows

Let's not dwell too much on Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows. I didn't like the first one, and despite all the reviewers (Steve included) telling me the sequel was an improvement, I found it... sedimentary, my dear Watson.

Guy Ritchie's freezeframe-the-action-sequences direction is completely lacking in excitement (God, I'm sick of bullet time). Robert Downey Jr. is wasted... again... though not as much as the original Dragon Tattoo girl, Noomi Rapace, utterly thrown away in her debut Hollywood role. Worst of all, there's no mystery whatsoever. The world's greatest detective is given nothing tougher than a mild Sudoko to puzzle over. The crime even Sherlock Holmes can't solve... what happened to all the mystery?

As for gags... even Stephen Fry struggles to raise a smile, getting his kit off as a last resort. Mad Man Jared Harris as Moriarty is the film's sole redeeming feature, but he's fighting an uphill struggle all the way to the Reichenback Falls. Speaking of death-defying escapes... just count yourself lucky, Guy Ritchie. If I'd seen this film one week earlier, it would have crashed into my Top Five Worst Movies of 2011 right behind Transformers 2.

Thank god for the REAL Sherlock... now that's the way to do it!

Movie Review: Immortals

I do so hate it when someone whose opinion I value and respect gets to review a movie on their blog before I do. Especially if they like it and I think it sucks wet ass through a straw. Who am I to disagree with Steve? His opinion is, I'm sure you'll agree, far more worthy than mine. He has the wisdom of age behind him, for one thing. Look, if you think Immortals is your kind of movie, stop reading this review now and go read Steve's. But if you want to hear someone have a good old moan...

I think I may have a problem with director Tarsem Singh. I didn't notice his name in the credits, I hadn't read it in any reviews, yet I soon recognised his style from the last time I was forced to sit through one of his films: The Cell starring Jennifer Lopez and Vince Vaughan (from way back in 2000). Like that film, Immortals is visually stunning. Both will stick in my mind as being two of the most picturesque movies I've ever seen. Tarsem certainly puts the money up there on the screen and has a painter's eyes for detail. Every shot is like Michelangelo meets Salvador Dali. It's almost more than the human eye can contain. And this one was in 3D too... you know what a colossal waste of space I consider 3D to be, an affront to right-thinking cinema audience everywhere... and yet good old Tarsem made it work. The 3D actually looked good. No, screw that, the 3D took my breath away.

It's a shame then that, as with The Cell, all Tarsem's attention goes on the visuals. Certainly none of it goes on securing a decent script to work from. You can't blame the plot - that's as old as the hills, but the script... man, this script was bad. Can we say "style over substance"? Can we tattoo it on Tasem's forehead so he'll see it every morning when he washes his face? Can we talk about the actors now?

The star of the movie is Henry Cavill, about who I knew very little beforehand except that he's been cast as the new Superman. You know what? I can see that. He did a pretty good job of pitching his Theseus somewhere between the big blue boyscout and his speccy, stuttering alter ego. Doesn't mean I gave a monkeys what happened to him, or the impossibly beautiful Freida Pinto who plays his oracle. Beyond them, John Hurt plays John Hurt (his default position these days) and Mickey Rourke plays the old Avengers baddie Orka The Killer Whale. Seriously. Compare the photo above with the cover below and you'll see what I mean.

Beyond that, I have little else to add. Immortals gives lie to the old maxim that you can't polish a turd. It seems, after all, you can. You can paint it up to be the most spectacular, sparkly, devastatingly beautiful turds anyone has ever seen - in 3D too! At the end of the day though, it's still a bum radish.

On the other hand...

Movie Review - Cowboys & Aliens

Hey - you like westerns, right?

How about sci-fi films?

Yeah?

What about Daniel Craig? Harrison Ford? Thirteen from House? Sam Rockwell? The Kurgan? Walton freaking Goggins?

Imagine them all in the same movie - wouldn't that be incredible?

Erm...

I had high hopes for Cowboys & Aliens, but it just didn't work. The two genres mixed like oil and water, with the western floating about on top only to be spoiled every time an unimaginative CGI alien flashed its jaws across the surface.

There are some fine actors at work here, struggling with a humourless script that attempts to cram in as many cliches from the two genres as possible. The plot takes some ridiculous leaps that would stretch credibility even if this were pure sci-fi. In A western, they just seem crass. The opening half hour is the best, but we'd seen virtually that whole story sequence already in the trailer. There were no surprises to be had and precious little fun. I grew increasingly fidgety towards the end, and that's the worst crime of all for a film featuring both Cowboys and Aliens. No way should I have been bored.

Dull.

Transformers 3 - Look, It Wasn't My Idea, Right?

Really.

They made me do it.

Considering how much I hated the last Transformers movie, surely wild horses couldn't drag me to a cinema showing the third one?

What can I say?

I'm weak.

I'm easily led.

I didn't have actually pay any money.

Please believe me, this was not my idea.

The annoying thing is, Michel Bay actually suckered me into believing this time might be different. The opening ten minutes present some genuinely interesting story possibilities. It's just the other six hours that are utterly unbearable.

Yes, this is an arse-numbingly long movie. It begins in the 60s, at the glorious highpoint of US history: the moon landing. The writers obviously wanted us to contrast this with the fall of the American Empire in the 21st century, and maybe there's some suggestion that the hubris that led man to walk on the moon ultimately brings about the downfall of this seemingly unstoppable world leader. Or something. Any suggestion of intelligent plot is jettisoned like a booster rocket as soon as T3 splashes down in 2011.

From then on in, we get more of exactly what you'd expect. Big fighting robots. Shia LaBeouf running, screaming and mugging for the camera. Some vacuous wooden underwear model who's drafted in to disprove the notion that Megan Fox is the worst actress in Hollywood. More sickening machine-porn and breathless disaster-porn than even Richard Hammond could dream of. And then... we get the Coen Brothers influence.

The last two Transformers movies have been graced by the smoked ham of John Turturro, slumming it for the paycheck - The Jesus would be ashamed. (And he's a pederast, dude.) This time, he's brought friends. Not just John Malkovich with shiny teeth and Bad Comedy controls turned up to 11... but Mrs. Coen herself, Frances McDormand. My god, Frances - what are you doing? My only hope is that your hubby and brother-in-law needed a cash boost for their next project and your appearance here is just a charity appeal. Any other explanation is too depressing to consider.

Still, let's look on the bright side. Transformers 3 isn't quite as bad as 2... in the same way that losing a testicle to a threshing machine isn't quite as bad as losing your whole scrotum.

Green Lantern

I don't like Green Lantern.

Never have.

Yeah, I read the comic when I was a kid. I read all sorts of tat when I was a kid. But apart from the days when Dave Gibbons was drawing him, and a soft spot for dumb redneck Green Lantern Guy Gardener in Justice League International, I never really got into the character. The problem with Green Lantern will always be too much power. He can do anything. He can do everything. The only limits are his imagination. Plus, like a lot of DC superheroes, the costume is more important than the man. We don't care about Hal Jordan because he doesn't have a life beyond saving the world. I can't relate to that in the way I relate to Peter Parker or Matt Murdoch or Ben Grimm. Because the secret identity is the mask, everything beneath the costume is a cipher.

Then again, I don't like Superman either, for many of the same reasons. Yet I still enjoyed 3 of the Superman movies (the first two Christopher Reeves more than the Brandon Routh) and I've managed to stick with Smallville through waaay too many dead horse flogging seasons. So it's not impossible to make a fun movie or TV show out of a comics character I have little interest in. You just have to put in a little effort. Sadly, director Martin Campbell, his five screenwriters, and most of the cast just don't bother. Green Lantern is one of the worst films I've ever seen. It's not just bad, it's Forrest Gump bad. And it don't get no worse than that, buddy.

Like Thor, Green Lantern spends half its time on Earth, and the other half in the stars. The difference is that when Thor had its head in the clouds, we were being treated to cod Shakespearian camp - a meaty chunk of soap that made the sci fi much easier to swallow. When Green Lantern is in space, we just get video game visuals and video game plotting. Then when Thor was on the ground, we got a fish out of water comedy, a gutsy love interest and impressive action sequences. When Green Lantern comes down to earth, we get Blake Lively and a helicopter on a willpower-created rollercoaster. And for all the nonsense backstory of Thor, at least it was a nonsense backstory based on epic Norse mythology. With Green Lantern, we get this...

Billions of years ago, a group of immortals harnessed the most powerful force in existence: the emerald energy of willpower. These immortals, the guardians of the universe, built a world from where they could watch over all of existence: the planet Oa. A ring powered by the energy of will was sent to every sector of the universe to select or recruit. In order to be chosen by the ring, one had to be without fear. Together these recruits formed the intergalactic peacekeepers known as the Green Lantern Corps...

I swear to god, if I'd submitted that for a first year high school English assignment to write my own science fiction story, I'd have failed. "The emerald energy of willpower"? Do what now? "In order to be chosen by the ring, one had to be without fear." Because fear and willpower are connected how? What's that legendary line Harrison Ford allegedly gave George Lucas? "You can type this shit, but you sure as hell can't say it." Guys, do you not think there are some concepts from 60s comic mythology that should be left in the gutter of the 20th century? Use the characters if you must, try and sell them to the modern age... but at least have a little respect for the intelligence of your audience. And for god's sake, don't open your film with five minutes of such asinine exposition... say what you want about George Lucas, but "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" suddenly sounds like high art.

It's sad, because the shrill and unpleasant poutiness of Blake Lively aside, there are some decent actors trying their hardest to make the most of Green Lantern. Peter Sarsgaard. Mark Strong. Tim Robbins. Hell, even Ryan Reynolds. Say what you like about him, but Reynolds has movie star charisma up the wazoo. He's got that Cary Grant / Harrison Ford grin down pat, and sometimes that's all you need to play the hero. He just doesn't get chance here. None of them do.

Green Lantern is a wasted opportunity. A waste of money. And most of all, a waste of time. I can't remember the last time I was so bored by a film. Or by any other activity save cleaning the toilet. This movie sapped my will to live. I couldn't even leave the theatre, so bad was the bright green halo of torpor. Maybe it wasn't willpower those immortal Oan guardians harnessed after all... maybe it was tedium. The green power of tedium. Maybe it really is the most powerful force in all the universe...

Season Of The Witch

So just before Christmas, we're at the cinema, me and I and P, about to watch Unstoppable (which I never got round to reviewing but it was all right, if you like based-on-true-story runaway train gubbins with Denzel Washington and the new Captain Kirk) when up pops a trailer for some new medieval action thriller with lots of dramatic set pieces, spooky intrigue and sexy witches. It was one of those trailers that build to a big, music-stopping reveal. Prior to the reveal, we were thinking: "this doesn't look half bad", "might be worth a go", etc.

And then the crescendo climaxed and in waddled Nicolas Cage.

A fat-faced, goateed Nicolas Cage in witch-killer armour.

At which point we all burst out laughing. "That looks stupid," we agreed. And that was surely the end of it.


Cut to: early last week.

"Do you fancy going to watch Season of The Witch?"

"I'd rather pluck my own eyeballs out with red hot sugar tongs."

How soon we forget...


Somehow, against my better judgement, I & P persuaded me. "But, it'll be shit!" I argued. "When has that ever stopped us?" came the reply. Surely, they argued, surely it couldn't be any worse than Solomon Kane?


No further review is necessary. If you're dumb enough (as we were) to go see Season Of The Witch expecting any kind of entertainment - you deserve everything you get.


Despite the fact that I named him Number 8 on my infamous list of Top Ten Worst Actors In Hollywood a couple of years ago, I don't actually dislike Nic Cage. When he's on form, he can be ridiculously entertaining. His mental-as-anything remake of Bad Lieutenant with Werner Herzog last year was the best performance I've seen from him in years. Season Of The Witch was the worst. He didn't just phone this one in, he sent it via Morse Code. From the coma ward.

As for the script, when your very best line is...

"We're gonna need more Holy Water."

...well, quite.

2010 - Films Of The Year

Let's be honest, it's not been a great year at the cinema. It has instead been a year in which most of the films I was looking forward to ended up disappointing. Hollywood's answer to a crap year at the box office appears to be to film everything in 3D next year... like that'll work!

Let's look at the biggest disappointments first... (click the links to see the individual reviews).

Rol's Worst Films Of 2010

5. Iron Man 2

I'm sure there were far worse films produced this year. But not many were quite so disappointing. Except maybe for this...

4. Paranormal Activity 2

3. Cop Out - No review, because I didn't catch it at the cinema. Instead I watched it on DVD. The first half hour, anyway. Kevin Smith... what happened? You've made some rubbish films in your time but I even found nice things to say about Jersey Girl. This though... this was just unwatchable. Mainly because the guy out of 30 Rock SHOUTED EVERY LINE HE HAD RIGHT IN MY FACE UNTIL I FELT PHYSICALLY ABUSED AND HAD TO SWITCH OFF AND WATCH HOUSE INSTEAD. Even Bruce Willis couldn't save this one.

2. The Expendables

Louise loved it. She thought it played as a spoof of 80s action movies. I thought Sly took it all way too seriously. Not the movie I wanted it to be.

1. Solomon Kane

Just shit.

Rol's Best Films Of 2010

10. Whatever Works - The Telegraph named this their worst film of the year. I've never been a huge Woody Allen fan, so I can't really compare it against his more critically acclaimed work. I am however a huge Larry David fan, and this made me laugh and warmed my cynical heart too.

9. The Social Network

Fincher & Sorkin - the dream team. A great movie, but it's still a great movie about flippin' Facebook... hence why slightly less accomplished films have beat it to the top spots.

8. Inception

Visually stunning yet cold, over-complex, and with a predictably annoying "is he really...?" twist.

7. The Disappearance Of Alice Creed

Gemma Arterton proves her worth. For this, I forgive her the dreadful Prince Of Persia.

6. Shutter Island

Another Leonardo DiCaprio film spoilt by its final twist. Still, as an actor he's far less annoying than he used to be.

5. The A Team

90% of the critics (and a good proportion of the public) hated this movie. I can almost understand why... but it made me smile more than just about anything else in the cinema this year.

4. Crazy Heart

Tries a little too hard to be feelgood and Oscar-worthy... but it's still got the World's Greatest Actor playing a washed up country star and Colin Farrell once again silencing the naysayers. Speaking of Oscars - it was about time.

3. Red

Flawed, like The A-Team... but still a hell of a lot more enjoyable than The Expendables. Bruce Willis shows Sly how to do the "old man action hero" genre properly.

2. Four Lions

Chris Morris. Genius.

1. Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World

If you'd told me at the beginning of the year - or the day before I saw it -that this would end up being my favourite film of 2010, I wouldn't have believed you. I'm still not sure I believe it. But good on 'em. This is how to do a comic adaptation - make it even better than the source material!

Paranormal Activity 2 - What Went Wrong?

Yes, yes, all those of you who hated the first film, you can leave your "I told you so's" at the door. (Yes, Kelvin, I do mean you!)

And yes, all those of you who liked the first film but knew the sequel was going to be pants: ditto.

So, I saw PA2 yesterday, and it was dull. It wasn't rubbish, but it was a huge disappointment after the first film. But... why?

1. They handicapped themselves from the outset by making this a prequel. Or a three quarters-prequel, anyway. The film deals with the sister of the heroine from the first film, and tries its best to develop a backstory regarding where the family's curse comes from. That's all very well, but in doing so it hampers itself - because if anything truly awful happens to the sister and her family for the most part of this film, then the characters in the first film would have been more aware and prepared for what happened to them. Which they weren't... which is why PA2 saves its real shocks for the final 5 minute epilogue which leaps forward in time to after the first film.

2. They go out of their way to avoid using the same shock tactics as the first film. Which is to be applauded... except... they don't actually come up with much to replace them. I spent the majority of PA2 waiting for something to happen. Anything! The first film was a slow-burner, but this didn't even start until the last 20 minutes. By which time most of the audience were tired of waiting for a jump.

3. The night-time highjinks of the first movie were captured by one video camera set up amateurishly on the dressing table. This time the family in question set up a whole houseful of CCTV cams to observe their spooky goings on... though there's actually less to observe. A definite case of more = less, the rule of thumb for all unsuccessful sequels.

4. The low-budget cast of the original were unknowns, and that worked in their favour. Although they reprise their roles here, the main characters are played by proper actors - recognisable actors in the case of the lead, Sprague Grayden, previously known as President Taylor's backstabbing bitch of daughter from 24. Her stage-school brat step-daughter stole even more of the shaky amateurishness that made the first film such a gem.

5. Maybe there's something to be said for the madness of crowds. I saw PA in a packed cinema full of jumping, screaming teenagers. Yesterday I went to a matinee with 10 other people, and nobody even squealed. I heard the occasional yawn, but that was it.

Maybe the true problem with Paranormal Activity 2 is the problem with all horror sequels. What made its predecessor work for me was that I didn't know what to expect. This time I went in with a bunch of preconceived notions... and they really couldn't win. Either they give me what I want, and I moan I've seen it all before... or they don't and I moan about that. You can't fool all the people all the time...

The Expendables

I never thought I'd hear myself saying this about a film, or anything else for that matter, but what The Expendables really needed... no, what it really needed... was more Dolph Lundgren.

Now I'm hardly what you'd call a Dolph Lundgren fan. In fact, up till now, I think I've seen a grand total of two of his films - Rocky IV (which was bollocks) and the original 80s version of The Punisher (which was utter bollocks, though not quite as bollocks as last year's woeful Punisher War Zone). I don't consider Dolph a great actor. Hell, I don't even consider Dolph an actor. Yet unlike many of his aged action hero comrades in The Expendables, Dolph appeared to know exactly what he was doing. He was taking the piss. And if there'd been more of that, The Expendables would have been a much better film. Unfortunately, Slyvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Mickey Rourke and (to a lesser extent) Jet Li appear to be taking this material far too seriously. And therein lies the tragedy.

Films like The Expendables can only really work (for me, at least) when they know they're rubbish. When they wedge their tongues firmly in their cheeks and glory in that very rubbish-ocity. Look at Willis. He's only there five minutes, but the smirk doesn't leave his face for a second. (Some believe the wind stuck when he was a particularly smug child and that's just his default expression. This Bruce-fan would never be so cruel.) Even Arnie, wooden as ever, knows he's here to take the piss. Stallone though - Stallone is serious. He's staked his career on this comeback, and he's desperately trying to make some kind of statement. Or rather, SUB KIBE OB STABEMEBNT. And Rourke? Oscar-worthy in The Wrestler, Raspberry-worthy here. That comeback didn't last very long, did it Mickey?

(The less said about Statham, as always, the better. I was disturbed to see him cosying up to Charisma Carpenter though - Cordelia's taste in men doesn't improve with age, does it?)

Don't get me wrong, The Expendables is not an unenjoyable way to spend an hour and a half if you grew up watching daft 80s action movies. There's enough OTT violence and dumb one-liners to satisfy anyone who ever claimed First Blood: Part II or Commando a classic. But we've all grown up a lot since then. Well, all but Sly Stallone. In Sly's world it's still 1985, Reagan's still in the White House, the video shop still rules home entertainment and dumb action movies may still have the PODENDIAL to CHAMGE BHE WORLB. "The Most Awesome Action Cast Ever Assembled"? Pity they couldn't have spared a few dollars for the script.