To celebrate the release of Snow White and the Huntsman on 30th May we have two of these generous prize packs just waiting to wing their way over to new owners.

The prize packs consist of…

* A sparkling apple shaped clutch bag
* An apple charm
* A t-shirt
* A Huntsman bag

… and you can see them at the bottom of this post.

To be in with a chance to get your hands on one of these great prize pack, just answer this simple question.

Q. In Snow White and the Huntsman, who plays the role of the evil Queen Ravenna?

For a hint, watch the trailer below.

To enter, e-mail your name, address, phone number and answer to competitions at averagefilmreviews dot com, with the subject line “Snow White Competition”.

Also, for an extra chance to win, visit our facebook page (facebook.com/averagefilmreviews) and like and share the competition post – it starts with the words ** SNOW WHITE COMPETITION **

The closing date is Sunday 3rd June 2012 at 6pm. Please note, you must be resident in the Republic of Ireland to enter this competition and afr’s general competition terms and conditions apply.

You can also check out more Snow White and the Huntsman videos over on the dedicated clips and trailers post

This version looks to be an altogether darker take on the story than Mirror Mirror, the Julia Robert’s family friendly affair we saw back in March. Of course, dark is just the way I like it but the biggest surprise about this is that Snow White and the Huntsman is the version from the “Producers of Alice in Wonderland” while Mirror Mirror was the one from Tarsem Singh, director of Immortals and The Cell… I guess everyone likes to try something different from time to time.

Just in case you didn’t know, Snow White is one of the many European fairy tales collected by the Brothers Grimm back in early 1800s. There are many variations but the best known version of the tale is probably the Disney one from 1937, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

In the Disney version, Snow White is the step daughter of an evil Queen. Obessesed with being the most beautiful in the kingdom and jealous when she hears Snow White will surpass her, the Queen sends a huntsman out into the woods to kill Snow White and bring back her heart as proof. The huntsman however finds it impossible to kill her, he sends her away and brings back an animal heart in an attempt to fool the Queen. Meanwhile, Snow White meets a group of dwarves and hides in the forest. Eventually the Queen, through her magic mirror, discovers Snow White is still alive, poisons an apple and disguises herself as a hag in a plan to feed to apple to Snow White and send her into an endless slumber. The plan is successful but the dwarfs find out what the Queen has done, find her and, after a struggle, the Queen falls to her death. The dwarfs place Snow White in a glass coffin where she sleeps on until, one day, a Prince finds Snow White, kisses her and awakens her from her sleep… and everyone lives happily ever after.

I get the impression that Snow White and the Huntsman is going to be a little different from the Disney one. For starters it appears the Huntsman (played by Chris Hemsworth) has a bigger role. And somewhere along the way Snow White appears to be raising an army! I certainly have no problem with a bigger role for Hemsworth and I’m intrigued to see where they go with Snow White as a warrior Princess. I’m not gonna lie, I’m a bit worried that we’ve got Kristen Stewart as the lead… but who knows, she was alright in Welcome to the Rileys, maybe she’ll pull this one off…

… oh, and Charlize Theron looks fantastic. All things equal, I think this could be fun.

I guess all will be revealed on 30th May.

In the meantime I’ve assembled all the clips and trailers I could find. What do you think? Are you looking forward to this darker take on the traditional fairytale?

UPDATE

update: 16 May 2012 New video added – featurette: Snow White and the Huntsman On The Set: Beauty Evil

RELEASE DETAILS

release date: 30 May 2012
director: Rupert Sanders
writers: Evan Daugherty, John Lee Hancock, Hossein Amini (screenplay)
cast: Charlize Theron, Kristen Stewart, Chris Hemsworth, Ray Winstone, Toby Jones, Lily Cole
genre: fantasy drama
running time: 127 mins

Official website: Snow White and the Huntsman official website
Official Facebook page: facebook.com/SnowWhiteandtheHuntsman
Official Twitter page: @SnowWhite

I didn’t know anything about Charlie Casanova before I saw, but I had heard that some people didn’t like it. That kind of thing means nothing to me really, I’ll always watch a film with an open mind, and I try to see the good in a film.

Well. Now that I’ve seen it, there’s only one good thing I can muster about Charlie Casanova. I thought some of the scenes were blocked and framed well. That’s it. Oh ok, there’s one more not negative thing… Emmet Scanlan can be admired for putting on a committed performance. Now that’s it.

Terry McMahon purports that this film is “a movie examining the delusions of corrupted elitism and the malignancy of class separation”. Its website says it’s “A Clockwork Orange meets American Psycho in an uncompromising look at our corrupted times”. Yes, Charlie Casanova does have lofty aspirations, I won’t deny that. Its metaphor is plain to see all through the film. You can’t miss it, it’s punching you in the head. Repeatedly.

The problem with the film is that somewhere along the way, it forgot to be a film. I’ve seen it described as a fractured narrative, but there is no real narrative as far as I can see. Watching Charlie wheeling around vomiting out this unrelenting nonsense only serves to irritate, annoy and ultimately, yes, enrage. There is nothing to this film, just a deluge of misplaced abuse, loosely bonded together by Charlie’s interactions with a collection of paper thin characters who appear only to feed the ego of this spitting maniac.

I guess this is all meant to provoke a reaction. It provokes a reaction alright. We’re supposed to hate Charlie, he’s a prick, a egoist, a sociopath and a fraud, he’s everything that’s wrong with the upper middle class. Except that he’s not the upper middle class. This film is a fraud, it’s galling and baiting for a reaction against nothing. Charlie’s not real, he’s not representative of anything. No-one like that could exist. Well they could, but not in the form that we see here. He’s sold to us as an Irish Psycho… there’s a fundamental problem with this. Characters like Patrick Bateman and Alex work is because they’re charming, we see them being charming, and when charm doesn’t work, they’re brutally fearsome. Come to that, if you want to stretch the goverment metaphor you could say that vote grabbing is all about charm or scare-mongering too… But Charlie Casanova is neither fearsome nor charming. He’s impotent caricature of a villain. Charlie couldn’t have a wife or friends. He’s an idiot. He’s pathetic. He’s a sad joke.

Just to be clear, this isn’t me “getting” the character. Don’t see that as an apology, as a reading of the character as a metaphor for the upper middle class. What I’m saying is that the character is literally pathetic. I couldn’t give less of a shit about what the film is apparently trying to say. I felt cheated by it. I don’t hate Charlie Casanova because it’s exposing the “truth” that the country is being screwed over by an immoral controlling class who’s willing to make life altering decisions on a gamble. I don’t hate Charlie Casanova because it’s challenging me by making me confront the reality of the class system in Ireland. I don’t hate Charlie Casanova because I’m reminded every day in the news that Ireland’s economy has been brought down by hubris…

… I hated Charlie Casanova because I had to sit through ninety minutes or so of loud, repetitive, stuccato, rambling garbage… occasionally punctuated by sycophantic fawning by a variety of dimly lit, wooden mouthed morons. Who I can only assume were meant to represent the Irish people? It that what this film is trying to say? In any case, a reaction provoked by hurting my ears is not the same as a reaction provoked by my listening to the words spoken.

But enough about the failure of the theme. As I mentioned earlier, it’s also just a plain bad film.

There’s barely a narrative here. We’re thrown from scene to character to rant seemingly at random. Sub-plots are started up, only to be abandoned 2 minutes later, never to be heard again. As you’d expect from a film that’s trying to be deliberately abrasive, there are scenes designed only to shock… but they come out of nowhere, with no context, leaving the viewer more confused than affronted. I’ve already mentioned that the Charlie is a joke but at least Scanlan does a decent job. The rest of the cast middling at best. I’m not sure if that’s due to direction or talent. In a project this personal it’s difficult to know how much control the actors had. What I do know is that this is not a coherent rail against the establishment, it’s just a mess from start to finish. It plays like an ill-conceived vanity project of conspiracy theorist.

I do have to wonder though if part of my problem with the film is that I live in Ireland. Is that why I can’t accept the haphazardly drawn social context of the film? I am reminded of another film which set out to deliberate shock for political comment – A Serbian Film (review). Is this how Serbians felt about that endeavour?

Course the big difference between Charlie Casanova and A Serbian Film is that A Serbian Film actually has a plot, and characters, and there’s no-one parroting paranoid drivel at you for half the film. Ok, there’s is for part of the film, but it’s only for about 5 minutes…

… And you know what, A Serbian Film was proper balls to the wall when it comes to transgressive cinema. Like the titular character, Charlie Casanova really is impotent.

Oh, it turns out I did get motivated. Maybe when you start a rant it’s just hard to stop.

2/10

Yesterday I posted up some clips and trailers for American Pie Reunion and today I have some goodies to give away!

To celebrate the return of Jim, Michelle, Stifler and the rest of the American Reunion gang, Universal Pictures Ireland have kindly given me two goodie bags to give away. The goodie bags comprise of…

* Two t-shirts (one men’s, one ladies)
* An American Reunion drinking game
* A cool pie-shaped bottle opener

They’re in the picture below!

To be in with a chance to get your hands on one of these goodie bags, just answer this simple question.

Q. In the American Pie movies, what kind of camp did Alyson Hannigan’s character, Michelle, go to in high school?

For a clue, watch this clip from American Reunion.

To enter, e-mail your name, address and answer to competitions at averagefilmreviews dot com, with the subject line “American Reunion Competition”.

**### COMPETITION CLOSED ###**

Also, for an extra chance to win, visit our facebook page (facebook.com/averagefilmreviews) and like and share the American Reunion competition post – it starts with the words ** COMPETITION TIME **

The closing date is Saturday 5th May 2012 at midnight. Please note, you must be resident in the Republic of Ireland to enter this competition and afr’s general competition terms and conditions apply.

For me, the American Pie films are firmly in the category of films I remember fondly, but not very well. I think I’ve probably seen the original American Pie twice and I remember laughing. So that’s a good sign.

I was a little surprised when I heard they were picking it back up after almost 10 years but the fact that they have the original cast back is a massive plus. It’s always a little sad when a tv show or film cast or a band, whatever, get back together and the members that have become more successful, or have faded away into complete obscurity, don’t bother turning up. To me, the fact that the American Pie crowd are all back for American Reunion hopefully means that they all have fond memories of it too and I truly hope that carries over onto the film.

The premise this time is… It’s 13 years on and (surprise surprise) they’re all back in town for their high school reunion. Yeah… I guess the clue’s in the title.

If you haven’t seen the original American Pie films I imagine there might be some references missed but the truth is, there really isn’t much to know. In the first film, four boys set out to lose their virginity before prom night. Shenanigans ensue. In the second, they reunite after first year in college and have a huge beach party. Shenanigans ensue. In the third, they all reunite for Jim and Michelle’s wedding (they got together in the first film). Shenanigans ensue. You get the idea. Undoubtedly in American Reunion, shenanigans will ensue.

I do look forward to those shenanigans because, despite the crude and lewd humour of the series, there was always a bit of heart to the characters and that’s something that’s often missed in some of the crude and lewd comedies these days. Oh and also, the guys behind the Harold & Kumar films have written and directed it. I love those films.

Of course by now you might be wondering… where are the clips and trailers? Well, wait a minute! They’re just down there.

RELEASE DETAILS

release date: 02 May 12 (UK / IRL), 06 April 12 (US)
director: John Hurwitz, Hayden Schlossberg
writers: Adam Herz (characters), John Hurwitz, Hayden Schlossberg (screenplay)
cast: Jason Biggs, Alyson Hannigan, Seann William Scott, Tara Reid, Mena Suvari, Thomas Ian Nicholas, Eddie Kaye Thomas, Chris Klein, Eugene Levy, Jennifer Coolidge, Dania Ramierz
genre: comedy
running time: 113 mins

Official Facebook page: facebook.com/AmericanPie
Official Twitter page: @AmericanPie

The title says it all really. News today is that a first poster has just been released for Martin McDonagh’s new film Seven Psychopaths. You might remember McDonagh as the writer/director behind the brilliant 2008 crime comedy In Bruges. It was Oscar nominated dontchaknow.

Seven Psychopaths first popped up on my radar back in October 2011 when it was reported that Mickey Rourke had chosen to take a role in it rather than appearing in the The Expendables 2. A month later he very publicly left the production, calling McDonagh a “jerkoff” but I’d already heard enough…

… McDonagh was teaming up with Colin Farrell again to make a film in which Christopher Walken was playing a professional dognapper. I was sold.

More details of the plot, and cast members, have since been revealed – Woody Harrelson has taken on the role vacanted by Rourke and Tom Waits, Sam Rockwell, Gabourey Sidibe, Abbie Cornish and Olga Kurylenko have all been added. I’m not generally one for reading the plot synopsis but if you are, you can have a look below. It’s more a character synopsis in any case.

Marty (Farrell) is a struggling writer who dreams of finishing his screenplay Seven Psychopaths. All he needs is a little focus and inspiration. Billy (Rockwell) is Marty’s best friend, an unemployed actor and part time dog thief, who wants to help Marty by any means necessary. Hans (Walken) is Billy’s partner in crime. A religious man with a violent past. Charlie (Harrelson) is the psychopathetic gangster whose beloved dog, Billy and Hans have just stolen. Charlie’s unpredictable, extremely violent and wouldn’t think twice about killing anyone or anything associated with the theft. Marty is going to get all the focus and inspiration he needs, just as long as he lives to tell the tale.

These images of the poster come from Collider.com, who spotted them around Las Vegas, which is all dolled up for this year’s CinemaCon 2012.

(If you ignore all the planned sequels of course.)

I was thinking before I saw this… I’m not so sure about superhero films any more. I mean, aren’t they all the same, really? There’s a hero/es. There’s a villain/s. Stuff happens. There’s a big battle. The heroes wins. The end. That’s it, right? How good can even a good superhero film be, really?

Anyway. I had that in mind this morning when I was strolling up to the screening of Marvel’s Avengers Assemble, or just The Avengers as it’s known outside of the UK and Ireland. Yes, it’s written and directed by the great Joss Whedon, and they’ve got Zak Penn, from the X-Men films on co-writing duty… but Whedon is completely untested on blockbuster scale so how much could that count for?

A lot apparently.

I’d enjoyed most of the films leading up to this, Iron Man (2008 review of Iron Man) was kinda fun… and Thor and Captain America: The First Avenger were good placeholders for the main event. What did shine in all of them was the main character. They were great heroes, it’s just that they were in films that were… flawed. Pacing problems, a lack of empathy, a lack of fun, that kind of thing popped up here and there in each of them.

Avengers Assemble has none of those problems. There’s plently of action and even when we got into the big battle, I didn’t find myself suffering the kind of fatigue that can crop up in a hero fight… sometimes I get a bit bored, especially ’cause… well you know how the fight’s gonna end. The film is also properly funny, and more importantly, at appropriate times. I laughed out loud. What surprised me most was that Whedon and Penn have even managed to bring a bit of emotion into it, unexpected but it works. Fact is, it’s 142 minutes long but I never felt bored.

My biggest worry coming into this film was that Whedon and Penn would be overwhelmed by the number of heroes. So many big characters were billed… Tony Stark, Nick Fury, Thor, Captain America, The Hulk, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Maria Hill, Loki… it sounded excessive. I felt there was a real risk that, in the effort to get everybody’s favourite character in, the plot would suffer. That fear was unfounded. They’ve managed to (mostly) balance everyone’s screen time and the way they’ve structured the relationships means that it’s all hangs together far better than I could have hoped.

Which is not to say that it’s flawless either. If I were picking holes, which… I guess I am… I would say that there’s one or two superhero clichés that crop up a little too much. Also, I wouldn’t say this is a criticism entirely, but I think you’d want to have watched the other Marvel films I mentioned earlier. Avengers Assemble saves time by not dwelling on the back story, it doesn’t really need to… but I think it’ll be a much better viewing experience for you if you know some history. I’d recommend Thor and Captain America and possibly Iron Man if you’re so inclined. If you can only watch one I’d go for Thor, it covers the most relevent stuff. Iron Man 2 is unnecessary. In general.

Acting-wise, plot-wise… It’s a big ensemble so it’s not exactly designed for either to shine. They do the job and they do it well. I’ll leave it to you to experience it yourself.

The question is though… Isn’t this just another superhero film? And the answer is… yes. It absolutely doesn’t step outside of that box. I’m not saying that it should have. But this film, as fun and exciting as it is, still wheels that well worn superhero rut. Wheels down it with glee. But it’s still just another superhero film. You can darken them down, add grit and grimacing, or you can paint them in bright colours and fill them with wit and charm… but… How good can they be, really?

Fortunately for me it turns out, I still love superhero films.

9/10

What can I say, I do love his work. Except for A Dangerous Method. I was sorely disappointed by A Dangerous Method. Not particulalrly because thought that it wasn’t “Cronenbergian” enough. Just because, I didn’t think it was a worthy piece of storytelling. I just didn’t find it in any way interesting or compelling viewing…. Sorry Mr. Cronenberg… Very sorry…

This is why I am all the more enthused by this first full trailer for his new film, Cosmopolis.

I don’t really want to get into the plot, partly because I don’t want to spoil it on myself, and partly because I suspect from the trailer that the synopsis at the moment is only skimming the surface of what happens in the film. I think the gist of it is, Robert Pattinson is in a car. Also, he may be bored of life. Then again he looks bored a lot of the time… going on his previous work.

Truth is, I stopped watching this trailer approximately half way through. It became increasingly apparent that this is definitely a film I’m looking forward to so I want to know as little as possible. That fact that it stars Robert Pattinson isn’t going to put me off, as I said in my Bel Ami review, I do think he’s capable of making a good film and I’m hoping this is it.

The important thing is, it looks like Cronenberg is bringing back some of the paranoid, surrealist and nightmarish elements of his writing that we haven’t really fully seen since eXistenZ. Even with Pattinson, in Cronenberg I trust.

Except for that one time.

The date on the trailer says May 2012, but as it’s a French trailer we just have to ignore that, it’s premiering at Cannes in May. IMDb has a small list of release dates for various territories but as of yet the US, UK and Ireland have not been announced.

I’ll be putting together a full clips and trailers post when an official US / UK or Ireland trailer comes out but for now… feast your eyes…

Source: Allocine

So far, only one trailer has been released however I did come across these today… Some interesting interactive posters for some of the main cast.

They were released over 7 major websites across the internet and I’ve collected them all here for your viewing pleasure. You can click the names below to go to the poster in question.

Clicking on the different pictures on the poster will highlight a different scene and give you a quote from the character.

POSTER CATALOGUE

Walt & Laura Bishop (Bill Murray & Frances McDormand) – via EW
Scout Master Ward (Edward Norton) – via Yahoo
Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis) – via Moviefone
Social Services (Tilda Swinton) – via Fandango
Cousin Ben (Jason Schwartzman) – via MTV
Suzy (Kara Hayward) – via The Rushmore Academy
Sam (Jared Gilman) – via IGN

… Because, my oh my, is there a lot of rubbish in Battleship. If you can get past that then it’s all smooth sailing. Or not, as the case may be.

The truth is that Battleship is a certain type film. You know, the type of film from based on a board game and brought to you by the people behind Transformers… It’s not actually directed by Michael Bay but I can’t help but feel like Battleship is Peter Berg‘s way of throwing his hat in the ring for any projects that Bay’s is too busy or too expensive for.

The similarities between this and Bay’s efforts are boundless, I’m pretty sure some of the sound effects are the same and they definitely borrow that slo-mo-noisy-giant-robot-flying-over-you shot more than once. Not literally, they have spent the cash on new CGI but it’s hard to see why they bothered. Similarly ripped is the idea that if you put enough “science type stuff” in it, no-one will notice that your plot is practically gibberish.

Not that it matters.

With three films under it’s belt, another on the way and over $2.6bn grossed world-wide, Transformers is a tried and tested product. Why try to do something different? I mean, I like the Transformers films, I’m not looking for anything different and I’m sure there’s millions of people out there who’ll be happy enough to see more of the same while we wait for Michael Bay to come back off his break. It hasn’t been released in the US yet and I don’t think it’ll be anywhere near as big as Transformers but it should do alright depending on what its competition is.

Ah, I’m not being entirely fair to Battleship (or I’m being overly fair, depending on your tolerance for nonsense) there are some differences there. Firstly, Taylor Kitsch is much more palatable than Shia LaBeouf, whose wise-crackin’ quickly became annoying. Kitsch plays the irresponsible bad boy with a touch of naivety and humility from the start so it’s easier to get on side with him. Also, Battleship has multi-million dollar pop superstar Rihanna. It’s not that she’s an amazing actress, this is only her first feature, but she’s a damn sight better than Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. Two likeable lead, and Liam Neeson? That’s got to count for something.

Mind you… technically, I don’t think Rihanna is the female lead… or perhaps she’s one of two. The real Huntington-Whiteley role falls to Brooklyn Decker, who spends most of the film involved in a sub-plot that you just know is going to turn out to be extremely important… but right now seems to be going nowhere. Slowly. She’s… alright. She’s better than Huntington-Whiteley anyway! That girl really was a waste of space in Transfomers: Dark of the Moon, at least Megan Fox had a bit of personality. She looked like she might kick your ass if you deserved it. Decker’s somewhere inbetween, but I think that has more to do with the dragged out pacing of her sub-plot than anything else.

It’d probably be remiss if I didn’t comment a little more on Rihanna really. After all, it is a bit of an oddity to cast a singer and not have her play a singer…

Honestly. For her first feature, she’s fine. If anything I think they should have done more with her. She’s hobbled with some awful dialogue but she does what she can and she’s a pretty believable bad-ass. Perhaps she didn’t have a lot of time to shoot but I would have liked to see them develop her character a little more. She plays a petty officer (it’s mentioned once) but she may as well have been a grunt* for all we know about her. Either she didn’t have the time or they didn’t want to highlight her and risk making her bigger than the movie. I hope her next role will give her a little more to do.

What else is good about Battleship… what else… Well the two best things are, it’s much funnier than the usual blockbuster action fare. I presume the tongue was firmly in cheek for a lot of the time and it worked. There’s an absolutely hilarious scene with a bunch of veterans late on in the show. Best bit of the film. Let me be clear though, it’s not that the characters or the dialogue is meant to be funny, it’s just all so ridiculous that you have to laugh. But, I certainly didn’t get the sense that Berg was unaware of this, so I’m putting it in the “pro” column. The second best thing is the music. There’s some good classic rock in this film. Always a plus.

Ok, if you really think you want to know more than the fact that a lot of things blow up in this film then I’ll tell you what’s wrong with it. The plot is overly convoluted, the aliens are singularly the most confused race of alien invaders I’ve seen since Plan 9 From Outer Space and the writers seem to have had trouble sticking to their own rules. Important rules. If you’ve seen the trailers than you’ll know that the invaders have put up a dome shaped force-field that we cannot penetrate… I’m genuinely still confused as to who and what was trapped inside that field. And unlike a lot of things I can ignore in action films… this kinda does matter. As does why the aliens choose to attack. Sometimes they attack people, sometimes they don’t. I have no idea why… and it kinda matters. Usually I can just ignore this stuff but these two points are a little too big for me to wave away.

That said, it’s still enjoyable as a popcorn-tastic spectacle of noise and colours so I wouldn’t let those things put you off if it’s what you’re looking for. This may not be the most cohesive action film you see all summer, but it’s a good laugh.

6/10

* or whatever the Navy equivalent is… seaman?