A couple of weeks have gone by and not much is really happening. Still looking for a house for next year, still wondering whether or not Las Vegas is happening or not, and still working on a script that will probably consume my time for a couple more years at least. Fun and games. Anyway.

I be in the pub, having a natter with a few of the guys and contemplating going home and writing more stuff. Considering that the days university agenda involved sitting in an empty room for two hours with no scripts to workshop, stands to reason that we could have got to the pub alot earlier. Ah well.

Anyway, next on the list.

Gattaca

So, I have been meaning to catch this film for some time. I’ve heard numerous good reviews regardng it, and bought it a while ago with the full intention of watching it soon after. No such luck. Sat on the shelf for about a year unwatched.

So,  man who has been written off all his life uses the life of another to follow his dreams, including going to space and banging Uma Thurman (valid dream, yes?) but the murder of his flight commander puts those dreams – and his freedom – in jeopardy.

Right, for some reason WordPress has decided to be shit and delete my old draft of this blog, so I’ll have to write a new one. Expect a blogspot version of this blog in the very near future, possibly even the next post. Anyway.

I seem to be developing an Ethan Hawke problem. Now I don’t doubt that this guy can pull it off, he was good in Daybreakers for what it was, and although he wasn’t on screen for very long in Lord of War, when he was on screen he didn’t disappoint. Problem is, in this film he did for me. It might have been because the nature of the world of the characters called for the majority of the cast to be as uncharismatic as possible, but I think the role needed someone else. Come to think of it, I reckon if Jude Law and Ethan Hawke had swapped roles this would have made a better film. Hawke’s character requires almost uncharismatic charisma. It needs him to emanate charm without trying, and Law can do that. Why else was he chosen to play Alfie?

I love the idea of this film, and it is executed believably, but I don’t think it really hits home on an enjoyment level. It has all the right elements, just not enough of them. Everything is average. Except for Alan Arkin. To memory I have only seen Alan Arkin in this and Little Miss Sunshine, and he was brilliant in both. For me he pulled this movie up from dull to enjoyable, so a solid 6 out of 10. Harsh, maybe, but I bought the DVD so I shall stick to my guns.

Right, another one bites the dust. Next review might be a while, owing to writing necessities and such. With that in mind I will impart the title of my next review, when I review it. Stay tuned.

Oh, and I have created that blogspot account, because WordPress is beginning to annoy me: http://adcaudle.blogspot.com/ – Next one will be on there.

Cinema employees.

Now I know that a few of you guys read this, so kudos to you, but to those who don’t work in a cinema, take note: We put up with alot of shit. Now granted this may not be as much as say barstaff, because they have no end of crap heading their way every night, but some of the crap that does come our way quite frankly is just unreasonable. Hell, I was insulted the other day for not letting a 14/15 year old child into Black Swan without ID, and her mother kicks up a fuss. Really!?

In all seriousness folks, we are not paid to put up with shit at work. We aren’t paid to put up with abuse, there is no reason for it, and it just makes work more stressful for everyone concerned. So if you’re thinking about taking someone who may look underage to see a 15 or 18 rated film, Get a Fucking Passport!!!

Anyway, now that that small, stupid pocket of the British public is known, back onto reviews, reviews reviews galore.

Appaloosa

Now this one had quietly slipped under the viewing radar for quite some time, having only been released in 14 screens across the US and only 169 screens over here. Which is hard to imagine, considering the cast on show (Ed Harris, Jeremy Irons, Renee Zellweger and Viggo F*ckin’ Mortensen). Might have been because this one was done for a relatively small budget and that the studios wanted to keep Ed Harris’ directing low key, but anyway.

Appaloosa – Two lawmen-for-hire (Harris, Mortensen) arrive in the town of Appaloosa, which is under the thumb of outlaw Randall Bragg (Irons). They proceed to restore order whilst both falling under the gaze of Allison French (Zellweger) a woman who may be more than she first appears.

She isn’t.

Now what, in honest truth, shocked me the most about this film, was that it was tragically mediocre. The set-up quite frankly is fantastic, there are also two wonderfully sharp ‘bitchslap’ moments and it has such a talented cast (which also includes Timothy Spall, who walks on water dontcha know!). But this film, for me, just fails to ignite.

I find that the reason for this is (and I hate to say this) Ed Harris. He directed, co-wrote and starred, and already that is a recipe for disaster. He has no-one above him telling him “No Ed, you’re being a dick, this film is really about Viggo’s character” and as a result his performance is really an attempt at show-stealing, and it doesn’t work. As talented as Harris undoubtedly is (and his dad is in this, oh yes, Bob Harris is still among the living folks!), Mortensen is a far superior actor. Hell, even on the DVD cover, Harris is further into the foreground than Mortensen, our supposed main protagonist. It just doesn’t work as an Ed Harris vehicle.

Also, Timothy Spall should stick to English accents. He wasn’t much good as an American. It’s Sean Bean from Silent Hill all over again, and it shouldn’t happen to wonderful British acting talent. Jeremy Irons can pull it off, but he has a proven track record of accents, all of them coming from Die Hard with a Vengeance, so he’s an obvious choice. Spall? No.

If I haven’t mentioned it yet, I will now. Zellweger was crap. Did nothing for me.

Although there are alot of negatives to this film, it is still watchable. Mortensen quite frankly should have shared the screen with Irons for the whole film, but we can’t have everything. Still, it’s ok if you want a fairly mundane western with a bit of a twist and turn in it, nothing special.

Oh, and Lance Henriksen. Beat that True Grit.

Next up will be a film I have been meaning to watch for some time now.

Gattaca.

Assignments are in. Must admit I am not all that fond of having group work to do, being a more solitary writing entity, but I’ll chip in as I always do. Quite looking forward to putting together some advertising material for the feature though, should be interesting to see what I can get done in the allotted time.

Also, I have had the chance to plough a little further into the script itself. Still a long way off, but we’re getting there so we are. I’m thinking a few days solid spent on it will get me past the finish line of first draft status, then I can look back and start to rip it to pieces.

Anyway, back to this reviewing malarky. Next up:

The Happening

Now, I haven’t seen a Shyamalan film since Signs. Never saw The Village or Lady in the Water, and I had no real interest in seeing this one, as I am not that big a fan of Mark Wahlberg, and to be honest, Shyamalan as well. I didn’t enjoy Signs. So I guess I went into this one with a closed eye to any qualities it might have possessed.

So, The Happening tells the tale of a man and his straying (not quite estranged, good start) wife who are caught in the middle of mysterious happenings in the US, when people suddenly start stopping dead, walking a few steps backwards and then killing themselves in spectacular (or unspectacular, if you count the old woman near the end) ways.

Spoiler Alert – I am going to ruin this films ending in this blog. I don’t often do this, but whoever doesn’t want to know, go and read something else. Now.

Jesus. Shitting. Christ.

Okay, first off, you have the main cast, Mark ‘I’m on camera so that must mean I can act’ Wahlberg, Zooey Deschanel, who is no good in this, and John Leguizamo, whose awesome talents were completely wasted in this film, pottering around when suddenly and without explanation people start to die. Not in a horrible way that would suggest malice, but of their own volition, which in itself is quite a sinister thought. Often in reality something must have really gone wrong in someones life for them to even entertain the notion of ending it. In all truth, this film might be the trigger that makes me end mine.

Now don’t get me wrong, the idea is astounding. People committing mass suicide. Why? Who knows, so Intrepid hero and his trusty wife and small hispanic friend set out to find out – except our hero is Mark Wahlberg, and they kill off John Leguizamo after half an hour. So the idea of creating a menacing scenario soon dies and becomes a stupid film that ends with the MOTHER of all twists. Wait for it…

IT WAS THE TREES!!!!

Yes. The trees. After making The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable (the former having a fine twist, the latter being one of my favourite films), M. Night Shyamalan makes this horseshit with the twist being that “some kind of evolutionary change in the plants is making them turn people suicidal”. Fuck off, I’ve seen more original and quite frankly more entertaining things in the bottom of a porcelain bowl. I just don’t see how he could have taken such a disturbingly good concept and screwed it up so badly. The casting of Wahlberg I can almost forgive, but only because even without him the film would have been shit.

Honestly, there were a couple of things I really liked about this film. There were some awesome set pieces, like people hanging from trees in a surburban street, the workmen launching themselves from the top of a building and some guy lying down in front of an active lawnmower. Oh, and that annoying kid from the Santa Clause movies gets a shotgun shell in the chest. Best moment of the whole film for me. Other than that, probably some of the poorest material to come out of Hollywood in 2008. Hell, apparently some of the affected victims could survive the effects a little longer than others. Just so they could explain what was going on. Bullshit. The audience is intelligent Shyamalan, get back to realising that.

So, with that utter crap out of the way, whats next? This is.

Appaloosa.

So, already there are many films on the list that require a watch – Black Swan, 127 Hours, The Kings Speech to name but a few. Not to mention the abundant list of titles filling up my shelving. So, to the next one.

Gladiator

Right, now the details of this one are pretty basic – Roman General is betrayed by the Emperor‘s Son, becomes a Gladiator and seeks his revenge. I’m assuming anyone reading this blog has a basic knowledge of film and as such has seen this film at least twice, so let’s move on as you know the film already.

I really enjoyed it the first time. Not so much this time.

Now it may be that I am under dental duress, or it may be that I have tended to only review films I enjoy and thus I am feeling a little harsh towards this one, but I found certain elements of Gladiator a little bit irritating this time round. Take for example the chronic Englishness of it all. Now I know this is me being ultra-picky and I can already hear the cries of “Ben-Hur was in English too!” but Ben-Hur was made by American film-makers who as far as I’m concerned don’t know any better. They are Roman, let the language at least be of that time or something like it. However, like I said, that’s incredibly picky.

Something less picky is Joaquin Phoenix. I remember some time ago I reviewed Buffalo Soldiers and I remember labelling him average. I stand by that. He brought nothing special to Gladiator either. He was okay when he got bitter and whiney when people were picking on Caesar (The lone native word used in this whole film other than ‘Praetorian’) but other than that Phoenix was bog standard. And get this, and I’ll put it in italics so it seems like a whisper…

So was Russell Crowe…

Now I’ve heard the new stories about how he flipped when someone labelled his accent in Robin Hood as ‘a bit Irish’, and in certain placed in that film I could agree, thing is he does it in this as well. Only once or twice, but still, he needs to talk to a language coach, specifically the one that taught Johnny Depp English.

Anyway, Irishness aside, Crowe was not special in this film. All I got from it was him waving a big stick about and shouting a few memorable lines that were probably put in big capital letters on the script so Ridley Scott could think “Ah, memorable line” but Crowe took as “Ah, Shoutey Shoutey”.He was okay, passable, nothing more. Hell, Mark Strong would have been better. There. It’s been said. Fighting words.

Also, I must admit that for a big budget film made by an English director, some of the camerawork and special effects are, quite frankly, piss poor. The instances when Crowe is lying down and it looks like he is moving? No. It looks tacky, and no justification can explain that away. Also, The Ridley’s use of slow or distorted motion? Pointless. From a technical standpoint these two little problems really drag this film down in my eyes. It doesn’t ruin it, but it detracts from what is otherwise a gorgeous looking movie.

Now going back to the acting, don’t get me wrong, this film is really good. Rarely does the Ridley let us British audiences down. He didn’t with this one, it was a corker. But not because of Crowe or Phoenix. Lord no, they were carried.

Step forward (or shuffle forward if you’re dead) Oliver Reed, Derek Jacobi, Richard Harris, Djimon (Motherf**kin’) Hounsou, David Hemmings, and Connie Nielsen. Were it not for that casting, this film would be utter shit. Now I am well aware that of all of the British elements of that supporting cast, Hemmings, Harris and Reed are all dead and Jacobi may as well be, but if it weren’t for their rampant pessimism Crowe would have looked like a Roman crackhead saying “there was once a dream that was Rome”. English negativity made this film great I say! In all seriousness, Reed was excellent as an ex-Gladiator turned trainer (Giraffes. Enough Said.), Harris was awesome and made Phoenix look ten times better than he is. Hemmings? Hells. Yeah. Jacobi was also very steady and at times wonderfully mis-trusting and bitter. After all, he is British. Add to that Connie ‘I also made Phoenix look ten time better than he is’ Nielsen and The Djimon, who aside from The Island and Push never does a bad movie, and we got ourselves a winner.

Now, going along the vein of wanting to watch films that I have never seen before in the hope that maybe I’ll find one I don’t like, the next film on my list is The Happening.

Well, Christmas Day has passed and all is well. There was Guinness, and undersized Y-fronts (You don’t want to know, I’m not going to tell you) and enough to keep me occupied for the day. Roll on Boxing Day and more present-filled shenanigans!

In the meantime, I sit up around 1am and think of things to do. I don’t really have any energy for writing my script at this hour, but I do find myself inspired to think about a critical scene towards what will be the end of it. I have made notes on it and I’ll get to it when I get to it. Thanks go to the film that will be the subject of the next post’s review, which I’ll mention at the end as always.

Now, back on topic, the next film under my reviewing scope:

The Prestige.

Story in brief: One magician is in prison facing death for murder, the other is dead. The story follows these two men as their lives led to this point.

One thing I have come to expect from Christopher Nolan is that you can never take any of his works at face value. Memento is a classic example. Man retracing his steps by practically living backwards. I never truly know what to expect with a Nolan film, and that includes Jonathan Nolan, other than one thing: I am never going to be disappointed.

For me, The Prestige sits in the same category for twist endings as The Usual Suspects. It’s pretty much flawless. I won’t reveal any spoilers, because I hate spoilers myself, but that ending has to be seen to be believed. The only thing that The Usual Suspects has over it is the source of the twist itself. However, The Prestige counters that by dropping the answer right in your lap in the first ten minutes, then spending the whole film convincing you it isn’t what the film just told you it was. It makes the whole experience that more enriching, knowing you’ve just been screwed over by a film director. It makes it even more enriching knowing that you loved every single second of it.

I must admit, if I had the wish to create a ‘top 20 movies of all time’ this would be one of my first entries. I don’t do that sort of thing because there are just so many fantastic films out there. I don’t have a favourite film either, but I digress. There is just nothing wrong with this film. It’s believable, edgy, witty, suspenseful and downright awesome.

If I were to change anything, and I mean if I seriously HAD to, it would have been to re-cast Hugh Jackman. I wouldn’t, because he is amazing in this film. He delivers his character really well, has a great chemistry with Bale and Michael Caine, and is just faultless. But if I seriously had to choose anything, it’d be him. Might just be because his role would suit alot of other actors.

Anyway, The Prestige is awesome. I love it.

So, that was a fairly standard review. Next up is one I haven’t watched in a few years, but I will brush up on it and give it a once over. Ah, Greeners, you will hate me if I get this wrong.

Gladiator.

Having finally got christmas shopping all finished, it’s nice to be able to sit back and take stock of things. Such as the fact that January will mark the start of the last five or six months of Uni as an undergraduate, save some daftly decided day in November when we actually have to pay to stand around looking flouncey.

Anyway, as promised, a small explanation is required. My friends and I have started to designate names to our regular haunts in town. Not by any means are any of these places seedy, they are simply growing personalities due to us spending so much sodding time within their confines, much like mafia New York. The list, as I understand it thus far, is as follows:

The Opium Den: HMV

The Crackhouse: Forbidden Planet

The Minimum-Wage Sweatshop – The Old Fat Cat

Hopefully there will be some kind of gambling den and whorehouse added to that list, because we all spend so much damn time in the same old places.

Anyway, with that out of the way, we move on to our next reviewing endeavour.

Godzilla.

Now before we continue, I will state now that I haven’t seen any of the original Godzilla’s or ‘Gojira’, so I am only going to review the 1998 version based on its own merits.

So, basic story – French Polynesian nuclear tests mutate the egg of an Iguana which leads to the creation of Godzilla, a huge monster that makes its way to and tears apart NYC. Tasked with figuring out how to stop it is Niko Tatopoulus (Matthew Broderick), along with his dim-witted reporter ex-girlfriend Audrey (Maria Pitillo) and some guy called Animal played by Hank Azaria.

Now this film is genuinely mildly rubbish. Everything about it screams “yeah, Roland Emmerich movie, bargain bin it and give me something Ed Zwick wiped his arse with”. From the tacky dialogue to the dated and obvious CGI, even the casting wasn’t particularly good. Having seen 2012 with John Cusack, it seems to be that Emmerich has a penchant for taking seemingly weak and feeble leading men and making them action heroes. It never works. Cusack, Broderick and Jake Gyllenhaal, shame on you all.

The problem (if you could call it one) is that I really enjoy this film. The reason for that is just that it is tacky and dated.

And because there’s some French guy in it called Jean Reno.

I am a big fan of Reno. Aside from the Pink Panther remakes which I will not see on general principle (those principles being that Steve Martin hasn’t made a good film for years, and I will not sully my memories of Peter Sellers and the original film by giving that crap my attention) I watch as much Reno as I can. Leon? Brilliant. Ronin? Awesome. Godzilla? Horseshit, but Reno makes it fun. A Frenchman playing a French character that does Elvis impressions and chews gum to pass himself off as American? I may slate Emmerich, but thats worth a watch.

Anyway, my fangasm aside, Godzilla is really bargain bin material. It’s great if you just want something on to pass the time, but if you are looking for something more engaging and challenging, look no further than my next instalment, coming soon.

The Prestige.

So, here I sit, watching Godzilla with young Macina, and looking up its director, a Mr. Roland Emmerich, who must be one of the most depressed men alive. Not because he’s German and they lost that thing that Basil Fawlty says we mustn’t talk about, not because he’s in Hollywood making movies. It’s because the movies he makes all revolve around the end of some form of civilization, be it New York City (Godzilla), the Northern Hemisphere of the Earth (The Day After Tomorrow) or everywhere on Earth except Africa, which apparently floats (2012). Emmerich just has a thing for killing off lots and lots of people. The man either has a rather radical theory about the overpopulation of our planet (which in a roundabout way I agree with) or he just likes mass genocide and hasn’t done any research into Slobodan Milosevic yet. Time will tell. Apparently it’s a Shakespeare film for him next. So a Hollywood tidal wave is coming to wipe out everything but Hamlet, because you just know that man packed a dinghy.

Anyway, Emmerich and my rantings aside, we come to the next film in this ever-growing expanse of reviewing nerditry.

Dead Snow.

Let me say that again.

Dead F**king Snow.

The story is this: Nazi Zombies in Norway. Unaware and nerdy backpackers. A Chainsaw. A Snowmobile.

Verdict? Fucking awesome!

I picked up the box for this film when I first saw it in the Opium Den (explanation next time) and it just looked so goddamn tacky that I had to see it. It looked like a film in the same vein as Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus (which by the way is so bad that it’s hilarious), the tacky, made-on-a-budget straight-to-DVD release that should start life in the bargain bin. By all accounts, this film should be absolute horseshit. But it’s not. It’s actually a half decent stab at zombie horror, with some utterly brilliant nerd protagonists! It’s almost like some Norwegian guy saw The Big Bang Theory, hated it and decided to kill off its characters in a way that beggars belief. This film is brutal in all the right places to make it both morbid and stupidly funny, there’s enough gore to satisfy the bloodthirsty, enough comedy to satisfy the Zombieland fans, and just enough backstory and character believability for me to say “you know what, I’d actually spend around £10 on that”. Luckily for me a friend got it for me for christmas, so I can sit back and save that £10, as I watch and re-watch ‘In the Hall of the Mountain King’ used to create one of the best horror movie openings I have ever seen. All for less than £100 by the looks of it. Spectacular!

Next up – you guessed it folks, Godzilla.

I sit now as a third year in one of the study carrels in our University library, pouring over my treatment and translating it to the screenplay before me. I must admit one of the things I find most enjoyable about the creative writing process is the re-writing. I like being ruthless. It’s something I have made almost habit over the past 7 or 8 years. Problem occurs, get to the root of the problem, fix it, move on. I’m told I have the subtlety of a hammer in such matters, and I agree. In a way I take that as a compliment, because I’ve always been of the opinion that subtlety is over-rated and it skates in pretty and pointless circles around the issue. Man up folks, and sort out your problems direct.

Now, small mini-rant over, back to the writing. GFH comes along ok, I’ve actually managed to get myself sat down writing it today, and with at least 12 pages done by close of business today I’d say that’s quite a good haul for about 4 hours work. Fingers crossed I’ll have the energy and impetus between now and January to do some more, I would like to be ahead of schedule again, and if I can have a first draft done and ready for me to rip it to shreds by January, then all the better.

Now, with regards to my film reviews, I can honestly say I have mislaid the list I was going to keep track with, so I am now going to start anew. Oddly enough with the only film from that list that I can actually remember.

The Final

Now, my better half has a taste for bad taste. And by that I mean she will happily pick up a horror film that looks like it’s been made for £25 and buy it, even if it costs £10. Personally, I am far more ruthless (its that word again) with my choice in films. I like proven quality and a film that I am going to remember for some time. Inception and The Last Samurai come to mind. That being said however, I will always give a film a chance, unless it’s anime or manga, which I don’t class as film. Yes, Akira, that includes you.

The Final is basically the story of a group of bullied American high-schoolers, led by one Marc Donato, as they punish the cheerleaders and the jocks in their class by holding the whole class at gunpoint and forcing them to admit their failings under fear of hostel-like punishment.

I must admit to being quite intrigued by the idea behind this one. I’m a fan of the cultural majority getting a kick in the ego every now and then, and this film delivers that kick. It’s got a fairly good mix of action and suspense to make it watchable, and it is.

Just isn’t much good.

For starters, and this is where the love of story editing kicks in, the majority of the film takes place in one room, where our lead antagoniser of the masses (Donato) just needed a dog-collar and a few stained glass windows to make him fit in with what he was doing. This was meant to be, by the looks of it, a smart, suspense-laced gorno with undertones of “two wrongs don’t make a right”. They could have just had some old guy in the corner say “two wrongs don’t make a right, my name is James Earl Jones, and you’re watching the Sci-Fi channel” and I’d have been just as entertained. For me, this film just didn’t work the way I fathom the creators wanted it to. The captors’ continued gun-toting throughout the film soon becaming un-menacing, and eventually, Donato’s heaps of dialogue just made me switch off. The guy can act, and he proved that, but not in a way that interested me as a viewer.

If I were to re-work this, I’d take away the guns and have each student in an individual cage. That way more time can be spent poking, prodding and tormenting them, rather than the shallow threat of “do this I shoot you, do that I shoot you, do either I shoot him or her instead” – too much of the same peril in a film without any reaction or conclusion to it deprives the film of its realism.

Next up – Dead fucking Snow.

I have decided when it comes to the film reviews to scrap the rating system. It may work for some people and not for others, but for me its just getting tiresome. I will still obviously state who I believe Mark Strong should be cast as, because its just the right thing to do, but other than that I honestly don’t feel the rating system is working for me. Meh.

Also, Dead Poets Society is not next on my list. This is:

The Three Musketeers
To clarify, this is the 1993 version with Kiefer Sutherland, Charlie Sheen and Oliver Platt, not the older Michael York version.

Now when it comes to Americans trying to pull off period drama, things tend to end badly. The characters are either too heroic (See The Patriot, in particular Mel Gibson) to be all that believable, or worse, Americans try to pull off period drama in a European setting. I guess I’m of the belief that American film producers just don’t have any clue about British or European history, and that’s why there isn’t a great deal of it around. Now, on the other hand, the British pull of period drama extremely well. Yes, we do it so well that it’s been done to death over the past 20 years or so, but it’s tried and tested. Also, there have been a few instances where American producers have come across the Atlantic and said “right, I’m American and I want to do a period piece, give me a British cast and crew”. This works. The Libertine is a prime example.

The Three Musketeers, as the famous story is told, sets itself in France and is the story of a young man who arrives in Paris to join the recently disbanded Musketeers. He happens upon three of the happy group who are none too pleased about said dissolution, and joins with them in a daring and dashing crusade to save the King. Sound American enough for you?

Now I like this film, purely because I am a fan of Oliver Platt, Tim Curry and Michael Wincott. I like it because it’s just harmless fun. It’s almost like the A Team of early 90′s cinema. Yes, people die, but it’s so unrealistic. Charlie Sheen may have a famous dad and a far more talented brother who uses a cooler surname, but that doesn’t give him muscles enough to kill a Cardinal’s guard by gently tapping him on the shoulder with a sword. Kiefer Sutherland clearly signed up to be first billing ahead of everyone else, and he didn’t hide it all that well. What makes this film for me is Oliver Platt and Michael Wincott. Wincott is just damn sinister as the almost panto-villain Rochefort, and Platt overplays Porthos so well you can’t help but laugh, which is essentially the point of this film. It’s taking it a little over the top and it doesn’t take itself quite seriously enough to be considered a proper drama.

With all that aside, I now move to the real star of this film, the one who just makes me want to watch this movie time and time again.

Paul Motherf**king McGann!!

Honestly, were his character the main protagonist in a film, I would watch it, just to see how much daft shit he would get into! It’s a hilarious character. Just popping in and out of the film at convenient times to piss off D’Artagnan and to give us a break from Chris O’Donnell’s romantic lead performance. This guy is brilliant, and it was either Michael Wincott kicking him in the nuts or laughing at all his McGannly brothers because he got a part in a big budget film, but McGann just sounds amazing in this. High pitched and as close to gay as you could possibly get back then. Paul McGann is only in this film for about 5 minutes, but they are by far the best 5 minutes of the entire film.

Oh, and you know damn well that Mark Strong would play Cardinal Richelieu. Man of the cloth sir? Oh yes sir.

Next time (unless I change my mind again) will be Unbreakable

Moving a room round, trying to find a friend a job/place to live whilst paying for his food for a fortnight (his parents take note – you owe me) and at the same time trying to juggle a delectable young fiction writer. Emphasis on ‘delectable’ not ‘young’, you pervs.

Anyway, I have been watching a great many DVD’s lately and thus am endeavouring to catch up on the reviews that the select few (and by that I mean five) of you read, whilst at the same time trying to get back to a writing schedule that is sitting in the corner and looking at me whilst sharpening the edge of some cardboard.

Saw the Ancient Shamans at the Soul Cellar in Southampton the other night, and as notorious a non-gig person as I am, I admit to mildly enjoying the experience. I still see absolutely no point in it, as I have speakers to enable me to enjoy music without the need for some sweaty teenagers or an amplifier, but it was fun to watch a friend get up on stage and do things with guitar strings that shouldn’t be possible. That and still be able to act like a complete tit on stage. Awesome show Dan Housego, you nutter.

Anyway, next on the list – The Rock

(oh yeah, I’ve figured out how to use bold on my blog – go me)

First off, lets have a look at Nicolas Cage. Not too close, because he’s a Coppola and more than likely has family ready to knock off anyone who walks up to him and says “Ghost Rider was shit”… which it was. His career has up to the present day been a real mix and match of good, bad and said Ghost Rider. You’ve had your hits like Lord of War, Kick-Ass and Face/Off, and your misses like Bangkok Dangerous and Captain Corelli’s Mandolin. The Rock, in my opinion, sits with the good side.

Now you may be wondering why I pick Cage instead of Connery or Ed Harris to say “they’ve done good or bad and this is good”, and the reason for this is purely because I don’t trust Cage as an actor purely because of his unpredictable choices in projects. Ed Harris and Sean Connery (when he was working) almost always went for solid roles that they could put across something meaningful with (The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen aside). It seems to me that Cage does what he wants, and while there is nothing wrong with that, it makes me cautious about watching his films. Anyway.

The Rock, is awesome. Why? Because it’s fairly simple. There are no vital plot twists, the characters aren’t overly complicated, and everything just fits. The Rock was the last film made by Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer before Don Simpson died, and I must admit that having seen a fair few Bruckheimer produced films, I wonder if Simpson was the cooler head of that production team. The Rock was high budget (it needed to be to have guys like Ed Harris, Sean Connery, Nicolas Cage, Michael Biehn and Stuart Wilson on board) but unlike a fair few of Bruckheimer’s films since this one nearly none of that budget was spent on fancy CGI crap. This film may have had big locations and some big set pieces (it is a Bruckheimer) but everything did what it was supposed to do. Everything was there for enhancement of the story and not to show of some massive robot balls.

By no means is this film an oscar contender, and by no means is it trying to be. This is an action movie with a big cast, big budget and John C. McGinley before he became the only decent character on Scrubs.

Oh, and some guy called Michael Bay did a fairly good job of directing it! I wonder how his career has been since then.

So, ratings for The Rock:

Acting: 4.5 – Simple, effective, no-nonsense. Every single actor stuck to their role perfectly, especially Nicolas Cage. He played a scrawny out of his depth scientist and the character evolved without that sense of vulnerability ever changing. Ed Harris playing a hard-ass general with a heart was believable, and Sean Connery was just cool. More of a role for John C. McGinley would have seen this rating a 5.

Directing/Cinematography: 3.5 – All I will say is, because it was Bay and Bruckheimer, there were some serious set pieces here – like planes underneath a bridge and a missile flying over a football game. I am not a fan of set pieces unless they are pivotal and although these didn’t do the film any harm, surely they could have figured out another way to do them. Good, but not brilliant. Same goes for direction.

Writing: 3.5 – Again, perhaps the writer could have figured out different ways to explain plot points instead of the producers throwing money at it and saying “make it THIS BIG”. Everything else was pretty solid.

Who would Mark Strong play?: – Either Ed Harris’ role as the gritty war vet, or John C. McGinley’s marine character. I’d love to see him try Nicolas Cage’s protagonist role though. I reckon he could do it. He can do everything else.

Overall: 3.5 – Good, solid action movie that involves a few good actors surrounded by actors and producers whose careers went to shit a few years later. Ghost Rider. LXG. Transformers 2. Need I say more.

Up next time: Dead Poets Society