The Human Centipede really is a film whose reputation precedes it. Pretty much everyone who’s watched the trailer or read the synopsis seems to think it’s sick as hell. So, if you’re gonna think less of me just because I’ve watched a sick film or two, you should probably just stop reading now.

You can’t really talk about The Human Centipede without knowing the main thing about it. I can’t imagine there are many people who’ve heard of it who don’t know what it’s about. The poster gives you an idea anyway… Just in case you really haven’t heard though… it’s about this crazy German surgeon who has decided he wants to make a human centipede… That is, he wants to sew a few people together face to arse and see how they get on. Yeah… what a bastard. Naturally, I was curious. I’m a curious person and everyone’s reaction to the idea of the film seemed so extreme that I just felt like I had to see it for myself. You can’t rely on other people’s opinions on this kind of thing…

I guess there is one more thing to say, before I get on to actually telling you what I thought of the film…

What you make of it will entirely rest on whether you’ve seen many films that go out of their way to shock you, and what you thought of them. I guess I’m talking about the full range here, from great films like Antichrist to crappy plotless films like Monster Man or Hostel. If you can’t handle films like these then you’re probably just going to think that The Human Centipede is sick filth and should be banned.

If, on the other hand, you have no problem with those then you might just feel the same way about The Human Centipede as I do.

Which is to say that I thought it was rubbish. The best I can say about it is that there were some nice looking shots in it and the mad surgeon Dr. Heiter (played by Dieter Laser) was good at being a creepy bastard in a B grade horror. Beyond that it had no real redeeming features whatsoever.

You know what, I’m pretty much just gonna tell you about what happens in it. It’s too hard to tell you how crap it is without saying something about the plot… I’ll do ya a deal. I won’t give away the ending. Hope that’s enough.

Anyway, so it all starts badly with the two American girls on a road trip in Germany. Well it’s not the opening scene but it is where it all goes wrong. These were two of the worst acted, most annoying characters I’ve seen in a horror film recently. I guess I shouldn’t have let it get to me, the tourist girls in a horror film tend to be pretty annoying and generally cast for their looks. But I did let it get to me, they were awful. Awful.

In true horror cliché their descent begins with a flat tyre in the forest. All the while they whinge and shriek at each other about whether they should go outside, who they should call, what should they do next… At one point while they were lost in the forest, lamenting away loudly, I turned to my mate and said “I can’t wait till her mouth gets sewn to an arse”. I hated these girls. Fortunately they soon found their way to the surgeon’s house and they didn’t have much to say after that.

Aside from those two there’s a Japanese fella who the doctor kidnaps when he realises his previous acquisition won’t match the girls. Poor Katsuro doesn’t really have much to do except scream in Japanese, he’s not entirely sure what’s going on but the diagrams soon make it clear enough. Lucky for him he does get to head up the centipede. That definitely looks like the best place to be. He’s pretty much a non entity throughout the film – aside from briefly, near the end.

That’s pretty much it for the character introductions. Our victims are completely one dimensional.

Dr Heiter is actually comparatively interesting. In that he has a back story. He is very successful and well-regarded separator of conjoined twins. Good for him. Course, now he’s retired and has apparently gone crazy. It’s not entirely clear why he’s decided he wants to join people together but I assume it’s meant to be some reaction to his previous profession. There doesn’t particularly seem to be a sexual element to it anyway. Thank the lordi. As horrifically unpleasant as that added theme would have been, I’m even more glad because I really don’t think the writer / director or actors would have had the chops to pull it off.

Anyway, as I mentioned, this character was the one bright spot in the film. Dieter Laser is one scary bastard and he does manage to make the doctor believable as opposed to laughable. I shudder to think how much worse this film would have been without him. Ok, ok, he is a bit of a cartoon villain but he’s entertaining and it seems appropriate given what he’s up to.

The real problem with the film is that it really is just plain boring. Boring and stupid. Just one example – One of the girls tries to escape but, because she’s an idiot, as soon as she finds a way out of the doctor’s house, she decides to go back to her drugged up mate. It makes sense because she can obviously carry her and she knows the doctor is incapacitated… oh, no, wait. That’s not the case at all. There’s no reason to go back for her. We don’t even know if they’re good friends, all we saw of them previously was them bitching at each other in the forest. Whatever.

Then there’s the whole gore issue. So the doctor gets the girl back and after some explanation using some overheads, the operation can commence. Then it’s over. You barely see anything. Not that I particularly wanted to see a dude sew someone’s face to another person’s ass, I really didn’t, but from the reputation of the film I would have thought you’d see something. I guess it’s slightly gory here and there but nothing compared to most in the genre. What the hell has everyone been talking about? Honestly. Yes, it’s a manky idea but overall the film just isn’t particularly sick. It’s boring… BORING.

Then the director does the big reveal and there’s nothing left but to watch the doctor trying to train his new centipede. I thought it would become clear then why he’d done it… but no. Just for a laugh as far as I could tell. Pointless.

Ok, at the end there is, what I can only assume is meant to be a shocking climax with some cops and stuff. Personally I just thought the ending all felt a bit rushed which I guess was fine because I didn’t really give a crap any more. I was actually falling asleep a little at this point. It’s not really a bad ending but I didn’t feel the impact that the film was so obviously desperate to create with it. I can’t really think of what else to say about it. I was happy it was finally over?

The truth is The Human Centipede is badly conceived, badly scripted and badly acted film. It absolutely does not deserve the attention that has been paid to it. It’s just another crappy low budget horror film made by a guy who had one shocking idea but no concept of what to do with it. I do believe that people can make whatever shitty films they want to make, but if they put it out there it obviously means I can say whatever the hell I want about it… and I call no-talent hack on this one.

I’m gonna stop short of telling you not to see it. I know if you’re as curious about it as I was then everything I’ve just said won’t stop you. I’d heard it was crap before I saw and I still watched it… and I’m glad I did. I always think it’s worth finding out what the fuss is about. It’s just that in this case it really is much ado about nothing.

3/10

In case you’re wondering why it got a 3 rather than a 1. I’m giving it a 3 because, as I mentioned, there were some nicely shot scenes. Also there was one funny scene with another driver on the road in the forest. Also it did make me retch a little bit, so there was an element of job done – but that didn’t really have anything to do with the whole centipede thing. Oh yeah, and it was kind of funny seeing how, most of the time, they kept strategically placing limbs to umm… preserve the girls modesty.

I wasn’t particularly expecting to like this film. I don’t really like country music and it sounded like a story I’ve heard before. I like to see new stuff, or at least old stuff taken in a new direction or seen in a new light. Crazy Heart didn’t really sound like there was anything new about it….

…and there isn’t. But despite that I enjoyed it. More than that, I actually liked it. Ok, it did really remind me of last year’s The Wrestler… and that in turn reminded of the documentary Anvil! The Story of Anvil… but still I didn’t mind. This is a good film.

The question everyone is asking though is “Does Jeff Bridges deserve the Oscar?” He certainly puts on a very good performance. I’m not a huge fan of Bridges, which is not to say that I don’t like him, I just haven’t seen that many of his films. Tideland is the only film I remember him in in the last 20 years – yes that’s right, I haven’t seen The Big Lebowski. He was good in Tideland alright but it doesn’t exactly make you develop a strong fondness for him.

Personally I’m not sure if he does deserve the award. I’m sure he’s going to get it… but having seen all the other performances now, I’m just not sure. I think Colin Firth is better in A Single Man. I also think Jeremy Renner is better in The Hurt Locker… well I’m not entirely sure about that one but he’s definitely as good. Either way it’s moot. He’s definitely gonna get it. When you’re a good guy and you’ve been nominated 4 times already the award threshold goes down a little for you. Actually let me be fair – he does deserve it in a general sense, I just don’t know if he deserves it for this role.

For what it’s worth, Crazy Heart is worth a watch quite apart from Jeff Bridges. It’s a good classic story well told and there’s great music in it. And like I said, I don’t even like country music. Then again these days when I think about country music I think of like… Taylor Swift. I’m sure there are those who would say that doesn’t count. The songs in Crazy Heart are the real thing, I’ll be very surprised if The Weary Kind doesn’t win the Best Song Oscar. It’s actually not my favourite song from the film but it is excellent.

I kind of feel a bit weird recommending that people go see a film that’s so unoriginal. Honestly, you’ve heard this story a hundred times. There really is nothing new in it, but I feel I’d be doing a disservice if I didn’t. I’ll put it this way. If you liked The Wrestler or if you like country music then go see this film.

8/10

I’d be lying if I watch a lot of Asian films at the moment, but I used to… When I did I found that the South Korean films often stood out to me. I don’t particularly know why, just that they had interesting ideas and were generally very well made. The horror films in particular were very strong but I also enjoyed their dramas. I decided then that I like Korean cinema – hey, there comes a point where you have to lay your cards down.

It pleased me to see that JDIFF this year is dedicating a section of their schedule to Korean cinema so I wanted to highlight them for you.

Without further ado, here’s a summary of the Korean films in the JDIFF this year.

Mother (Madeo) – Friday Feb 19, 6.30pm, Cineworld 9

Mother is the latest film from Bong Joon-ho, writer/director of The Host and Memories of Murder.

If you haven’t seen those films I would highly recommend them. They’re very different though. The Host is great ol’ monster film, it’s like Cloverfield except more fun and not so hard on those who suffer from motion sickness. Memories of Murder is a crime drama based on the story of Korea’s first known serial killer. Think along the lines of Zodiac but oddly funnier…

Mother is a return to murder/mystery genre for Bong. It follows the story of a single mother (Hye-Ja) and her mentally challenged son (Do-joon). When a young girl turns up dead, suspicion falls on her son and Hye-Ja relationship with him is tested to breaking point.

I’m sure it will be better than I’m making it sound, after Memories of Murder I have faith that Joon-ho Bong will make this something brilliant.

Castaway on the Moon (Kimssi pyoryugi) – Saturday Feb 20, 6.15pm, Cineworld 9

This one looks like an interesting one. I’m not familiar with the writer/director at all but I like the idea of the film.

It’s about guy down on his luck. He’s lost his job, is heavily in debt and his girlfriend has just dumped him. He decides to pack it all in and jump into the Han river… things don’t go to plan though and when he wakes he finds himself stranded on a small island in the middle of the river. A modern day Robinson Crusoe. He decides to buck up and get on with his new life but things take an odd turn when a woman, a recluse confined to her apartment, notices him. What kind of relationship can you have if you never meet.

Like I said, sounds like fun.

Breathless (Ddongpari) – Sunday Feb 21, 6pm, Cineworld 9

I’ve heard a lot of buzz about Breathless lately, which naturally means I’ve been avoiding reading about it. Unfortunately I don’t think I’m going to have a chance to see it in the festival but I’m hoping it gets a general release. If you have a chance though I’d recommend you go along.

Like most of the Korean films in the festival, the director of this film is also the writer. The difference here is that Yang Ik-Joon also plays the lead. It’s probably simplest to say that Breathless is a gangster film. Or at least it’s about a gangster. I was a little disturbed by the description in the JDIFF programme, no offence meant folks, but it kind of put me off a bit.

Basically the film is about a low-life debt collector living in a spiral of violence, abuse and anger. Nothing new there I guess. But when he meets a schoolgirl he find he’s met a person who may force a change in him.

I guess it’s impossible to summarise a film without making it sound a little simple. I am assured by the internet that this is a film that is worth of the buzz around it so I hope you’ll go along.

A Brand New Life (Yeo-haeng-ja) – Tuesday Feb 23, 6pm, Cineworld 9

French-Korean writer/director Ounie Lecomte used her own life to inspire the story of A Brand New Life. The film is about a young child who finds herself abandoned at an orphanage, not knowing why or what to do next.

The ratings on IMDb seem good and it has won a couple of awards so I assume this is a good solid drama. Probably not a particularly happy drama but I wouldn’t hold that against a film.

Hansel and Gretel – Wednesday Feb 24, 6pm , Cineworld 9

This one is a little older than the other Korean films in the festival. It was first shown in South Korea in December 2007 and has been on the festival circuit ever since. It seems unlikely that this will receive a general release so if you don’t catch this at JDIFF you probably won’t get to see it on the big screen here again.

Out of all the Korean films it’s probably the one that sounds most interesting to me plotwise however that may be a bit of a risk It is a horror film though and I’ve enjoyed most of the Korean horror films I’ve seen Hmm.. I wonder if my budget can stretch to another film… anyway I should probably tell you a bit about it.

Hansel and Gretel is a… reworking I suppose… of the classic fairytale recorded by the Brothers Grimm. Eun-soo is a salesman, on the road late at night, heading to visit his sick mother. He gets a phone call from his wife and, distracted, he runs his car off the road and awakens hours later in a dark forest. A little girl finds him and takes him to their “House of Happy Children”. Creepy kids, car off the road, dark forest. You know this isn’t going to go well for our salesman…

I’ll leave it there but the more I read about it the more likely I think it is that I’m going to make a dash to Cineworld next Wednesday night…

So that’s all the Korean films in the festival. Let me know if you’re thinking of heading to any of them and if you do go along let me know what you think!

You can book tickets to any of these films through the Korean cinema section on jdiff.com

It seems like people have been talking about The Lovely Bones for ages…

Well actually they have been. The fact that the Irish release date was moved back twice has not particularly helped with this but with a very staggered worldwide release and the presence of Irish actress, Saoirse Ronan, we really have been hearing about The Lovely Bones for a long time now.

By the way in case you’re not Irish and you’re wondering how to pronounce Saoirse, it’s seer-sha… now you know.

Anyway, I had been looking forward to The Lovely Bones for a long time. I started reading the book ages ago but I never really got passed the first few chapters. It’s not that I didn’t like it, I actually found it extremely emotionally moving, I just don’t read that much so when I put it down I never got around to picking it back up. I knew there was a film coming out eventually so I thought I would just wait for it.

I can’t really work out if this was a mistake or not. The reason I picked it up in the first place was that I heard it was an excellent book. Unfortunately it’s not an excellent movie. I wouldn’t say it’s a bad movie. There are plently of other people out there who are saying that… I disagree. However I can’t in good conscience say that it’s a very good movie. Maybe I should have read it. On the other hand if I had read it I might have been more disappointed so perhaps I am better off. I should probably read it now.

The problem here is that the film is just completely out of balance. The whole fantasy world thing looks beautiful and perhaps in the book it all ties together somehow but in the film it just seems out of place. As a result those scenes serve as an interruption to what could be, and mostly is, a compelling story of a father trying to find his daughter’s killer while his family falls apart. I’d love to say that they should have just thrown out the heaven sequences but I assume that, if you’ve read the book, it would mean that you’re really just making a completely different film. Also it would have left Saoirse Ronan pretty much on the cutting room floor and she was actually pretty good.

There are some strong performances in this film. I really enjoyed what little we saw of Susan Sarandon and Michael Imperioli. Stanley Tucci was particularly excellent as George Harvey; I personally felt a genuine disgust toward him. You root for his demise over any legally meted justice in this case. He is absolutely deserving of his Oscar nomination, he’s been a fine actor in everything I’ve ever seen him in and he’s really well overdue for this recognition. Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz were also sufficient in their roles. I have no complaints about them.

It’s just so unfortunate that this film went wrong. There are some really great scenes and great performance but overall it just didn’t work. Oh, also there are a few lame scenes toward the end which I assume are in the book and probably make sense there. In the film they are quite jarring. By then though it’s just kind of like, oh well.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that people shouldn’t go see it… it’s a story worth seeing, but I would warn people not too expect to much from it. Mitigate your expectations and hopefully you will enjoy it.

6/10

Nowhere Boy is a biopic centred around the early life of John Lennon, from around when he starts playing guitar. I’m not actually sure how accurate a portrayal it is. It’s apparently based on Julia Baird’s memoir called Imagine This: Growing Up With My Brother John Lennon. She was his half sister. It appears that the director disagreed with McCartney regarding the potrayal of Lennon’s aunt but given that most of the people involved are dead I guess we’ll never really know. Apparently things were not as… heated, shall we say, as they might appear in the film. I sort of assume that the truth is somewhere in the middle, I’d like to think that if it was completely inaccurate there’d be more hullaballo over the film. Either way, it certainly told me a lot more about John Lennon than I knew before.

I guess since all this is a matter of public record, it’s not really spoiling to say that I never knew there was anything different about Lennon’s early life; that his father left when he was young or that he was raised by his aunt or anything like that. It was interesting to learn about him after all I would consider myself a big fan of The Beatles. I mean it’s not like I own any of their albums or anything but I think highly of them… that’s what happens when you’re as averse to spending money as I am.

So, I found myself really enjoying this film. A lot of this was down to the kid playing Lennon, Aaron Johnson, he was very good. I really thought he captured the idea of Lennon’s character in the film. This kind of cheeky tear-away, charismatic but at the cusp of being dangerous. I have no idea if Lennon was really like that but I believed Johnson.

To be clear though, this isn’t a film about The Beatles so if you’re expecting any of that you’ll be sorely disappointed. They don’t even say the name in film. Paul McCartney is around but only briefly really. Given his reported misgivings about it’s accuracy I wonder if he’s seen the film.

I’ve often thought it must be really odd for McCartney and well… just Beatles week on BBC last year. All this fuss about what must have been for them, it’s just a few mad years they had when they were younger. They’ve lived a long time since then, I’m sure they like looking back at some of it but surely when people draw conclusions about what it was like, for example in this film, it must be very strange for them.

Guess I’ll never know.

Anyway, I did like this film. I wouldn’t recommend that it’s one for everyone but if you are interested in a family drama and you’re willing to accept that you’re probably watching a somewhat skewed version of Lennon’s childhood then give it a look.

7/10

Up In The Air is based on a novel of the same name by Walter Kirn. I don’t know that novel but I am familiar with the director – Jason Reitman. He directed Juno but more importantly he directed the excellent Thank You for Smoking. A film I would heartily recommend to everyone. Up In The Air I also recommend… and on balance I would recommend it to everyone… but with certain reservations.

I guess I’ll have to explain a bit about this film, I won’t be giving anything away that you haven’t seen in the trailers though so don’t worry.

Basically George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, a man who’s dedicated to his job. His job happens to be a professional firer. He’s contracted out to other companies to tell their staff that they’re fired. He lives his life in airports, on planes and in boardrooms all over the USA, rarely physically “touching base” as they say. When a new recruit, played by Anna Kendrick, comes on board, Ryan finds himself saddled with… baggage.

To be honest, I didn’t find it completely engaging, but then again I did like it. It’s a bit of a puzzler because so many people I know really thought it was brilliant. I found it difficult to relate to. Course I am lucky; I still have my job… I know more than a few people who have lost theirs in the last 12 months, but this film isn’t really about that anyway. It’s about… what people value in life… to sum it up in one. I still don’t really know why I found this film so difficult to relate to though. Perhaps it depicts a lifestyle and an attitude that is so far from my own that I just don’t understand it.

So, when I say I’m recommending it with reservations it’s because, while I wasn’t mad about it, I can’t deny that there is something to it. I’ve thought long and hard about what I didn’t like about it and I can’t point to it so I have no reason to not recommend it. Especially when there’s a chance that others will take a great deal from it. The only thing I will say against it is that I thought it was a little slick…

For what it’s worth, it is a smart, solid story and, as I mentioned earlier in the week, there are some great poignant scenes. There’s a bit of drama, there’s a bit of romance, but it just never quite came together for me. It is however a very good character study and George Clooney does a good job. Anna Kendrick is grand as well. I’d never heard of her before but I gather she’s in Twilight, so good for her, this should keep her out of the typecasting for a while.

Hmm… It probably is time I started talking about the Oscar buzz. Everyone else is after all.

This is probably one of the most hotly tipped contenders for the Oscars. It’s been nominated for 6 Golden Globes and it’s George Clooney who’s attracting most of the heat. So far in the awards season he’s well ahead in the Best Actor stakes. Ok, last night he just missed out on the Critics Choice Award however with the Golden Globes tomorrow it’s hardly the one he’s focussed on.

Having seen the film, I don’t know if he’ll get the Oscar. We all know that it’s not necessarily all down to the performance but I just don’t know that he’s done enough here to win. The other thing is is that I do believe that the Oscars like to be different… so all his wins may put him out a little bit here. Then again, I hear this year they’re trying to be a bit more populist, extendeding the best picture category to 10 to take in a bigger range of films and all. It’s really a hard one to call.

Then again, who are the other contenders? As I also mentioned earlier in the week, I hear that Colin Firth gives the performance of a lifetime in A Single Man. I’ve seen The Road now and while I’d say Viggo Mortensen has a good chance at a Oscar nomination but I don’t think the buzz is there and I’m not sure the range in his performance is big enough win it for him. I’m still holding out for Jeremy Renner and his performance in The Hurt Locker but the thing is I’m really not feeling the buzz around anyone else this year. Maybe Clooney has it in the bag.

Best picture wise… again I’d like to say The Hurt Locker over Up In The Air? Well actually I’d like to say Inglourious Basterds but that’s just not going to happen. What do you think yourselves?

Anyway I forgot to do the rating before I started talking about awards… so here you go.

7.5/10

REVELATIONS 6:8

I was looking forward to The Road. As I mentioned in some previous posts, I’m all about post-apocalyse movies.

Post-apocalypse / dystopia a favourite genre of mine. I really like the idea of examining how individuals and society (or societies) might respond in the face of total catastrophe. I suppose I just feel that society is, to a certain degree, a self-perpetuating artificial construct so I wonder, if there is an interruption, what changes would that bring to its perpetuation. Would society collapse? If it does, would a new one rise from its ashes? Would they build it better? Or would the individuals left just eke out survival and that would be it. Is there a critical mass of people needed to create a functioning society? What would happen? It’s fascinating.

Sorry about that random diversion, it’s just that I’ve said in so many posts over the last while that I like post-apocalyptic and dystopian stories so I thought it was about time that I explained it a bit…

Anyway.

This film is an adaptation of the Cormac McCarthy novel of the same name. He also wrote the novel that 2007′s No Country For Old Men is based on dontyerknow. It’s directed by John Hillcoat, who I hadn’t really heard of before, and stars Viggo Mortensen, a man who surely deserves an Oscar by now. Actually I thought he deserved one for A History of Violence but he wasn’t even nominated that year… Basically The Road is about a man and a boy trying to survive in the world after an unexplained apocalypse.

I really thought I would like this film. Well… ok, it’s not that I didn’t like it… I was just left with the distinct impression that I had seen it all before. And yes, I’ve see a lot of this genre of film and I’ve read a good bit of this genre as well so maybe I have seen it all before; but I was rather hoping that there would be something different about this one. I don’t believe that it’s a completely “done” genre. I still believe that these can be powerful emotional stories, whether they are cautionary, hopeful, funny, depressing, introspective, whatever. Everyone I knew who had read the book says it is so depressing and the reviews (that I’ve skimmed over) are all saying that it’s so crushingly depressing so I was expecting more of an emotional punch here… and I think they missed the mark.

Ok, it was depressing… it’s post-apocalypse. It’s generally depressing. But I didn’t feel involved in their story. Now I will admit, I do generally prefer the genre with a bit more hope than this film and maybe more hope would have made me feel more involved with them… but I don’t really think that was the problem. I think one of the problems I had was that we got little sense of what was driving them. Sure there’s that primal urge to survive, that fire, but it was never fully dealt with in the film. What was driving them? Is it hope? Is it sheer bloody mindedness? There are hints of religion here and there but again, not fully dealt with. Even the breakdown of society wasn’t particularly dealt with…

As far as I’m concerned, if you’re not examining the individuals, the society or any particular relateable thematic element (like faith or war or the environment) and nothing much happens plotwise then what is your film about anyway? It’s just a cold look at two people taking a long walk down a road to nowhere… and this walk wasn’t half as eventful as that other long walk Viggo Mortensen went on not that long ago…

…Oh, I don’t know, maybe this is meant to be a story about a father’s love for his son or something. I hope not, because I think that would draw unfair conclusions about the mother… unfair because her story’s never really told either. I’m clutching at straws to find a point to this film really and uh… I kinda sound like I hated it, I didn’t hate it. I guess I just wanted it to be more than just run of the mill. It was very… flat. Well there was one scene in particular that I really liked. That one where our characters showed an emotion other than fear or anger. That was a good scene. I do wish I had read the book, maybe it fills in some blanks…

…Or maybe I really have just seen this story too many times.

Nah.

5.5/10

This latest film adaptation is Guy Ritchie‘s version of Sherlock Holmes. I haven’t seen many Guy Ritchie films, nothing against him but I just haven’t been interested in anything he’s made. Well, I was almost interested in RocknRolla but then it just passed by… out of interest; people who did see it, was it any good?

So… not knowing much about Sherlock Holmes and not having an opinion on Guy Ritchie meant that I was fairly unencumbered by expectations. Actually come to think of it I don’t know why I went to see it at all… I wasn’t even particularly interested when I saw the trailer… Whatever the reason, New Year’s eve saw me at the newly opened Swan Cinemas in Rathmines at 1.40pm heading to Sherlock Holmes….

… and I’m glad I did. This is a fun movie. Throughly enjoyable from start to finish. Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law and Rachel McAdams are all excellent choices for their roles and the plot is engaging and sufficiently mystery filled to sustain interest. Well actually the plot is a bit randomly complicated but I felt it worked for the characters so that was grand.

Aside from that there isn’t a whole lot to say. It’s a detective movie with some action thrown in… oh yeah. The costumes and sets are cool as well, is this eligible for an Oscar? They love that period kind of stuff.

Anyway I heartily recommend this if you’re looking for a fun easy watch this weekend and I for one hope they get to make that sequel.

7.5/10

Personally, I had been rather apprehensive about this whole Avatar business. I can’t remember the last time a film promised so much (well… maybe Snakes on a Plane but that was really a different kind of promise). It’s been 12 years since James Cameron made a feature film… 12 years is a long time. Of course that film was the highest grossing movie of all time ($1.8 billion worldwide, just so you don’t have to look it up)… but then again, not everyone looks back kindly on Titanic. I actually liked and still like Titanic, but the idea of Titanic in space with a load of blue monkeys? Uh… I just wasn’t so sure about that. And of course Cameron also directed Terminator, Aliens and True Lies. All great films but I just don’t know how this all fits together.. what kind of films does James Cameron do? What kind of film was Avatar going to be? And there’s so much riding on Avatar – Cameron’s reputation of course, but the way it’s being sold, the future of 3D cinema as well. This film is supposed to push 3D out of kids films and horror and into the mainstream. It was too much, too puzzling, I just couldn’t get behind this film wholehartedly.

I’m almost hesitant to tell you what I thought of it. I think you’d be better off if you go see it yourself first. Stop reading now if you haven’t seen it… or read on if you’ve seen it, or if you prefer to hearing other people’s opinions before you see a film… it’s up to you, just don’t say I didn’t warn you, but I do think it’s one that you might want to keep your ears and eyes closed about it beforehand.

If you are still reading on then I think Avatar is going to be a bit of a divisive one, particularly because I think there’s a chance it’ll draw in more than a few people who don’t watch movies a lot… I hope it does anyway. Which is not to say that I think people who don’t watch movies a lot will particularly love it or hate it. Some will and some won’t. I just mean that there’ll be more people talking about it than your average genre film. For example, I doubt My Bloody Valentine was particularly divisive. Not many people who don’t like horror would go to see such an obvious horror/slasher film so it’s not like there’d be many arguments about it. Avatar on the other hand is being sold very wide, wider than I think the genre/s fit. I’m not sure exactly what genre it is but it’s definitely being sold outside it.

Mind you, the genre is irrelevent in a way… I think everyone should see this film. Not everyone will like it but I definitely think everyone should see it. There will be people out there who just aren’t going to buy into the big blue aliens. There’ll be other people who just don’t like sci-fi. There’ll be sci-fi fans who aren’t happy because it’s not sci-fi enough… that doesn’t matter. The fact is, it looks amazing… let me say it again, AMAZING. I could go on with a few more superlative adjectives but it’s not worth it, you’ll just think I sound nuts. Amazing I tells ya. You just have to go see it. It is worth it…. Even if your brain hates it your eyes will enjoy the feast. I liked the 3D in it too. It was used very effectively, there were a few “coming out of the screen at you” moments but a lot of it was giving depth to scenes, just making things look more realistic. It was different from the other 3D I’ve seen. Then again, it’s a very different film from the other 3D films out there.

Will it revolutionise cinema though? I don’t know. First of all, I don’t how much this kind of thing costs and let’s face it, big budget film making is all about the money. But also I don’t know how well it would work with other films. I can see it with the big summer blockbusters, certainly Transformers and Star Trek would benefit from it but I still don’t think that it’s worth it in every case. I guess it really depends on the maths…

In general though, it’s not a great film, it’s a good film but not a great one. Or at least I wouldn’t put it up there with the rest of Cameron’s work. I think in another review, I mentioned that I don’t particularly watch individual films in the context of a director’s overall work. And that’s true. But in this case it’s easier to reference his because… well… I’m just finding it difficult to find a genre to review it in. It’s not really a sci-fi film. Sure, it’s in space and there’s aliens all over the place, but it’s really just a normal drama set against the backdrop of an alien planet. But, you couldn’t compared it to something like… I dunno, Almost Famous or something. I was very much reminded of The Lord of the Rings trilogy watching it. It truly is an epic film. Cameron has created a whole world for us, so I can’t say it wasn’t great because it was a bit of a corny love story. It’s like saying The Lord of the Rings films are just three films about a very long walk. That’s just bollocks.

Ok anyway, this film has really got me waffling. Let’s get down to it. Avatar is a good film but it’s a bit mainstream for my taste. It’s not really entirely a straight up love story like Titanic but it’s more than half way there. The pacing is reasonable but it’s slightly long (about 2 hours 40 mins) and I found the music more than a little annoying (it’s comments like that that are the reason you should watch a film before reading the reviews – now when you watch it you might be listening out for the music and this isn’t a film where you should be worrying about the music… but anyway…). That said, it’s not like the music spoiled it for me, it was just annoying. Characterwise, it’s ok. I wouldn’t say they are well developed but it’s not that kind of film so it doesn’t matter. Acting is fine, a bit shaky in places and the best actors probably aren’t on screen for long enough – I’m pointing at Sigourney Weaver and Giovanni Ribisi here – but there’s nothing painful or shocking about it. The plot is predictable… but again, that’s just the type of film it is. Some films are predictable, it’s not a bad thing, it’s just a thing. It’s not awful though, it’s engaging enough and generally sustains itself across the 160 minutes or so.

All these complaints aside though it’s still a good film. In fact it’s almost a great film. I found myself immersed in this alien world and if a film can do that then it can’t be bad. It is thanks in no small part to the visual effects but also it’s pretty much a full realised world. The Na’vi are a distinct culture and they are a believable culture in my eyes given the world they inhabit.

Anyway I do urge you to go and see it if you haven’t already. It does look AMAZING and yes, it is worth it just for that. And do spend the money on seeing it in 3D. This kind of work deserves to be seen the way it was designed to be seen. Just don’t expect too much from the story. In that respect it’s competent but it’s not worthy of those superlative adjectives I didn’t use to describe the visual effects.

8.5/10

Share

The force is strong with this one. Umm… the Paramount marketing force that is. This is apparently now the most profitable movie of all time. So of course, I wasn’t expecting much going in to it. Actually I genuinely wasn’t… I do wonder if I would have been better off carrying a bit of anticipation though, because as it was, I didn’t think that much of it. Maybe I would have enjoyed it more if I hadn’t been expecting so little?

In the interest of full disclosure I should probably mention that I felt very sick for the last 30 mins or so of this film. I was only queasy for the middle 30 mins. I’ve always had a problem with motion sickness and the whole shaky hand held camera really gets me. I can’t even watch people playing First Person Shooters and this was well beyond that. The last time I felt it this bad was at Cloverfield. It was a bit more tolerable during Cloverfield though. That might have been because the film was a bit more fun…

It’s not that Paranormal Activity was a bad film, it wasn’t. It was fine. As I think it through though, I realise that I can’t really point at the “best bit”. Because there wasn’t a best bit. But then again there wasn’t really a worst bit either. There was a stupidest bit, but I’ll leave you to pick your own, if or when you see it. There were also some pointless bits. And yes, there were some scary bits. I guess what I’m saying here is that it was a bit bitty.

My main problem with it was that it was cheap. Not that it was cheap looking but that the scares were cheap. It was real “things that go bump in the night” scary. There was nothing that was really… … let’s just say I kind of expected there would be a more insidious creepiness to it. It was all a very straight up “BE SCARED NOW!” kind of thing. I would have liked to have seen a bit more thought behind it. Not that I like jump scenes – like I said, cheap – but all the scares were pretty telegraphed and that was annoying. What’s the point of a jump scene you warn someone about?

Ah no, I’m not being entirely fair. I mean ok, I may have been watching a film starring the two least haunting aware characters I’ve ever seen but yer wan Katie really did have a great scream. I was well impressed with that. And I quite scared by it to a certain degree. I live alone in a two bed apartment and I’ve never been up to the attic so… uh… I’d rather not think about it. But it’s not like I had trouble sleeping or anything, it was no Exorcist and it was certainly no Event Horizon

In the end, I was disappointed by this film. Which is not to say that I hated it. Or that I think that people shouldn’t be scared by it. On the contrary, I think many people are genuinely scared by it and there’s nothing wrong with that. I save my disdain for people who are into the stuff like Michael Jackson: The Live Seance. I just didn’t think it was a great film.

I really think this might be one of those rare films that would be better on TV. I could imagine renting the DVD, watching it with a few friends and having a good time. Or watching it alone at home and being terrified. But in Screen 2 in The Savoy it just didn’t seem up to much.

Or who knows, maybe I was just put off by the nausea; it’s hard to appreciate an atmosphere when you think you might need to run to the bathroom to be sick any minute. I gotta start taking travel sickness tablets before watching these types of films…

5/10

NB: I am somewhat dismayed to see that there are plans for a Paranormal Activity 2… did Hollywood learn nothing from Blair Witch 2?

Also, shout out to the Paramount marketing team on this one. Great job folks.