Reviews

'Batman Begins' is one of Christopher Nolan's best movies, and is the best Batman movie ever made. He brings in a new and enlightening arc to the central character with interesting new perspectives and huge emotional depth.

Christian Bale is exceptional as Batman, helped by his awesome Grade A tier acting. Liam Neeson brings a cold and calculated, if a bit too plain, approach to his character. Cillian Murphy is beautiful and haunting, charming the screen with every soft voice line. Tom Wilkinson feels like a true scumbag that's pushing above his station. Katie Holmes is the only weak link with a mediocre performance.

The screenplay and cinematography is awesome and the pace is brisk and excellent - nothing is left to idle which is exactly how a comic action movie should be played. It's a darker but also fun take on Gotham which has multiple chapters and a lot of content.

A very unique and stylish movie, 'Children of Men' has many hallmarks of a greater film that could have been if a better script was presented to director Alfonso Cuaron.

Clive Owen can be a good actor, but here he looks bored playing an unlikeable and shallow character. Julianne Moore fares a lot better but isn't given enough screentime. Chiwetel Ejiofor feels miscast with a character that resembles almost nothing. Michael Caine makes a strong impression with a dose of much needed humour. Clare-Hope Ashitey is fantastic, witty and has huge emotional range.

The overwhelming one shots and screenplay choices are niche, but executed very well and I enjoyed the one take cinematography. However the overall plot and story is unrealised, and whatever interesting world building that its initial acts set up ultimately snap off completely by its final poorly thought out conclusion.

The worst movie that I have ever had to dish out physical money to a cashier in a cinema complex, 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' is disrespectful to all the fans that had been loyal to the series and especially to one of its main cherished characters.

Rian Johnson is one of the worst directors. I have witnessed his ignorance and abuse of established characters when he was a guest director for Breaking Bad. He tears away any pretence of character and instead just spews out manic and twisted 'alterations' that causes serious harm to the overall story - it's incredibly destructive.

Daisy Ridley continues to perform well, and she looks great in the outfits and costumes she is given. John Boyega is trying hard but fails in every scene he is in. Adam Driver's character is more involved, but despite his attempts to bring sincere emotion, all that is left is cringe. Oscar Isaac looks angry and frustrated at the whole thing. Kelly Marie Tran got a lot of abuse from critics, but surprisingly I found her performance the most relatable to the spirit of the original series.

An enormous number of character and plot abuses are conveyed with no consideration as to the audience's intelligence, with raw comedy of the lowest denominator mixed within this spiral of insanity that dares to brand itself as a Star Wars movie.

Somehow carrying on from the original trilogy, the story of 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens" is conveyed in an alien and unfamiliar way, largely ignoring what made it predecessors so successful.

Daisy Ridley is actually very good and brings in an abundance of energy, but her character is given too much unfathomable power without training or cause. John Boyega is awful and arguably the worst casted in the entire series. Oscar Isaac is an outstanding actor but gets messed around a lot. Harrison Ford is the only true character that receives a lot of undeserved abuse.

The entire movie is confusing. On one hand its clearly a retread of 'A New Hope' which should make sense, but on the other it's this weird establishing of a new world that feels like a parody of the world it is supposed to live in. Many scenes contain dialogue that come out like dribble and the writing pulls the movie apart.

Objectively good in places, and reasonably coherent, 'Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country' feels like a relic from an aged past, and with it demonstrates that the original series had stayed around for too long.

Director Nicholas Meyer makes similar credits and mistakes from his previous contribution to Star Trek. The positive being an easier to understand and sensibly cultured inspired story, but the negative being a sense of averageness from the cast, especially from guest secondary characters, and in addition having most of the film shot in dimly lit enclosed interior rooms which overall makes the movie a bit boring.

With real heart from Leonard Nimoy's second director outing, 'Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home' succeeds somewhat due to its better realisation of the comedy and sense of family, coupled with real warm and comfy Star Trek shenanigans done with innocence and charm.

The entire cast have a lot more energy and enthusiasm and genuinely appear to enjoy themselves. There are also a lot more sets and overall chapters to the movie that create more content.

However its hard to ignore that the movie effectively cheats from the consequences of its two previous movies, and the premise for the main antagonist of the story is incredibly stupid that makes the experience enjoyable only if one is in the right mood.

A necessary film to make due to a reckless decision in the previous movie, 'The Search for Spock' is passable and fun in some places, but overall it suffers from some of the problems in the previous outing.

William Shatner is more likeable in this third instalment, and emotionally resonates as a father and friend. DeForest Kelley has fun with an unusual persona. Merritt Butrick and Robin Curtis feel miscast and stale the fun in the scenes they are in. The best contribution comes from Christopher Lloyd who is mesmerising.

There is a sense of amateurish to the overall direction at times, and this is has to be attributed to the inexperience from Leonard Nimoy. In addition however the script is really unconvincingly, and only set designs and emotional outpourings save the film from disaster.

Improving on its predecessor by changing the formula, Director Nicholas Meyers clearly understands the basic principles of movie making, and creates a better paced and occasionally engrossing Star Trek tribute that is firmly grounded in the storytelling and style of the TV Show.

William Shatner is an okay actor, and although he is given a better script, he still lacks the authoritarian grandeur of the classic Kirk. Leonard Nimoy has more to do and is given important key scenes. DeForest Kelley is largely a supportive role and doesn't drive the story much. The star of the show is the amazing Ricardo Montalban who is charming and well built for the role.

Although its watchable with some charming Sci Fi entanglements, the majority of the film is shallow, especially for Star Trek, and some of the overacting combined with the large degree of underacting creates a movie that has only small layers of discernible exposition.

Astonishing in parts with expert writing, 'Scarface' has all the markings and makings of a great movie. Director Brian De Palma puts a huge amount of meat and grit into the character arcs, but by its ending the movie becomes tiring due to it manic and unfocused screenplay.

Al Pacino is excellent for the most part. He brings in a confident, nothing to lose thrilling persona that is likeable until the script changes him into a psychotic freak in which he does what Al Pacino normally does - go into long rambling monologues and shouts around the place.

The crime world, their bosses and how they operate are the most interesting parts of the movie. The second half however feels as if it didn't understand what the first half was all about, and we are left with a lot of argumentative and unfunny romantic adult debacles and cheesy chase/action sequences.

Although interesting in parts, director Morten Tyldum fails to focus sufficiently on what is interesting and instead creates a character drama that drags too much and looks like an amateur college production in parts. This is due to an unnecessary dullness and darkness to try and artificially date the locations and visuals.

Benedict Cumberbatch is amazing as always, but his character comes across inconsistently, sometimes overconfident and arrogant, while other times childish. Keira Knightley is an actress I've always struggled to engage with, and again she comes across more annoying than compelling. Charles Dance is the best of the cast, and the absence of his character in the second half is detrimental to the movie.

Overall by focusing almost solely on the main group involved, 'The Imitation Game' fails to create a sense of world building on how these events here mattered to their superiors and to their families. This not only made it hard to stretch the running time, but dampens some of the impact the key scenes create. It's a shame because most of the dialogue is very good.

Highly interesting, and comprising of the emotional as well as the factual, 'Monarchy with David Starkey' is a deep, meaningful and thought provoking insight into the life of nobility and the effect on their families and counsels.

David Starkey is a phenomenal historian, who takes life seriously and gives the material he covers the deepest respect. When the speaks he uses his eyes to communicate as a king would.

Complimenting him is fantastic editing, wonderful enchanting music, and an array of actors/actress portraying the figures. The location work is incredible and really captivates you into the world of greatness and grandeur.

Engaging and emotionally driven, 'Troy' is a great film directed by Wolfgang Peterson who puts his heart and soul into the characters and the action.

The casting is perfect. Brad Pitt is phenomenal, and his keeps his sometimes overconfident ego in check and produces a grounded and likeable champion. Eric Bana is sensational and proves once again that he means what he plays. Orlando Bloom surprisingly plays a role perfect for his frame, timid and weak, instead of the brave strong characters he would later mistakenly be cast for. Peter O'Toole for me has the best scenes with his voice reaching deep into my soul.

It's a huge story that should be complicated, but it is told so masterfully to the point that you really care for the events and for the characters. Contributing to this are competent sets and well scaled battle action. It's a mighty movie that gives you a lot for its running time.

A hard film to really make, director 'Benjamin Ross' creates a horrifying and unsettling psychological horror that is, during its first half, gripping and mentally disturbing to the point of nearly making you want to vomit.

It's an odd cast. Hugh O'Conor is a quite splendid in the roll, managing to remain confident and certain in the character's decisions. Ruth Sheen transforms quite grotesquely during her screentime. But Roger Lloyd Pack feels out of place.

There are effectively two films here. The prior being a certain horror and the second being an investigation. It reaches high levels of tension and suspense, and there are injections of comedy that are actually sometimes to its credit, but overall it really struggles to balance the two and it's a difficult film to digest without your stomach turning.

Abundant in quality CGI and great cinematography, 'Where the Wild Things Are' is a strange and somewhat non child friendly animated movie with an unexpected amount of angst.

Max Records is a great childhood actor with powerful eyes, and he brings in the necessary reactive element to the array of arguments held by the 'monsters', all of whom are voice acted well.

The big gripe with the movie is that it is at war with itself. One side wants it to be a light-hearted kid friendly show, and the other side a triggering emotional breakdown drama. The result pulls it towards being geared for adults instead of children, and young children in particular are going to be bored and confused. It's a shame, because there is a huge sense of caring, and the dialogue is very good in the last two acts.

With stunning performances from all the cast, 'The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc' is a powerhouse of energy and madness, thanks to the amazing Milla Jovovich who commands the screen with both fury and anguish. The way she moves and conveys emotion cements her as the big carry for this film. In many ways its her defining movie.

The location work for the most part is great, but the film places itself in a difficult position as the writing and emotions of secondary characters lends them to be unlikeable, and despite it being an historical film, feels more poetic than insightful, with the political entanglement and religious bigotry not being executed with sympathy or excitement.

Complimenting the unique presentation, combining first person and third person, 'The Beyond' is more of a character drama rather than a mystery investigation Sci Fi.

Jane Perry feels like the right pick for the cast, she comes across like a parent with the underlying guilt over her decisions. Nigel Barber needed a bit more emotional anchorage. Noeleen Comiskey is fantastic and feels very human given the humanity and lightheartedness that was required against her trepidations.

The first half the movie is very promising, but the second half clearly demonstrates extreme lack of effort and ambition, almost to the point of causing offence. The screenplay and cinematography is great, but the CGI is mundane almost to the point of appearing like tacked on stock footage. Overall it's a failure, but a hearty one with a glowing spirit.

Quite poorly told in a lot of areas, 'Howls Moving Castle' is not an anime for those expecting a good honest fantasy or Sci Fi. Many of the aspects of this fantasy is random, similar to stories by Terry Pratchett.

The film's large error is that it doesn't set it rules out very clearly, and introduces characters that end up becoming so different from their initial first act that it derails the energy and enthusiasm.

It's one of these animes that is niche for those 'in the know' behind what is supposed to be happening, but looking at the pretty picture in on itself from a blank canvas, it makes little sense and its world is almost incomprehensible.

A movie that's too ambitious for its script 'Flightplan' doesn't really compute in the logic department, but does try hard to produce a meaningful and emotional rollercoaster ride.

Jodie Foster is phenomenal given the lacklustre script and Sean Bean is surprisingly attractive, managing to stay professional and serious with the nonsense unfolding. Peter Sarsgaard is very forgettable.

This type of movie really needed to stay in the air midway with some real thought and progression, but as the movie unfolds it becomes clear that its all sauce and there is nothing attracting the audience to care about what happens next due to its increasing unlikeliness. It overall feels very short, and shouldn't have really been made, even though in parts its quite competent.

'Gangs of New York' is insatiably violent, largely to its detriment. It drives into the precursor of violence as a flex for characters to provide exposition, but the script isn't strong enough to make meat out of it, and the film comes off as being quite confusing.

Leonardo DiCaprio is an A tier actor, but here he feels too subtle and lacking the energy and oomph that he always brings to the table. Cameron Diaz is forgettable, as unfortunately most of her roles are. The absolute star of course is Daniel Day-Lewis, who steals the show with every scene he is in.

Unfortunately that ultimately becomes one of its big problems - it becomes the Daniel Day-Lewis overacting show, and everybody else is either underacting or written so poorly that there is no chemistry. The movie is also shot poorly at times, with the story all mangling together to become hard to care about.

Ridley Scott is a director I can't admire or commend. He takes good ideas with epic proportions, often presents violent battle scenes, yet with 'Kingdom of Heaven' he produces a movie that is incredibly boring.

This is partially due to him not getting the best from his huge array of cast and characters. Orlando Bloom is horrible, and is one of the worst casting choices for a strong blacksmith in cinema history. Eva Green is gorgeous but spends most of the time staring hoping we would be entertained by her eyes and implications. Liam Neeson makes a strong impression but does not get enough screentime. Ghassan Massoud is the most engaging; his scenes being captured with high amount of gripping feel and I wished the movie focused more on him and his followers.

The critical flaw is that the movie has far too many characters, and overall its impossible to get invested when each have such little time to emotionally invest in. And for honesty's sake, the historic context is far from the ideal theme for an entertainment movie.

Being quite lazy in parts, 'Hanna' underdelivers with little substance. After an initially interesting and promising first act, all the momentum dissolves into a lukewarm child's fantasy that feels akin to a teenage comic. To compliment this, the movie has an array of strange and unlikely secondary characters, most of which feel like they've come out of an 80s family sitcom.

Saoirse Ronan is quite a wise pick with her charming face and anime killer eyes, but this idea of her character is rejected for a wooden doll replacement. Cate Blanchett is fantastic as always, but literally stumbles around the screen with all her grace removed. Eric Bana always impresses, but his character is not fully fleshed out and becomes meaningless.

Overall the movie is a waste of a good cast. Director Joe Wright clearly didn't want to make a blockbuster here, and his lack of motivation is evident in the final result.

Starting off on a sensible foot, 'Replicas' lays the groundwork for a potentially interesting drama about human sentience and ethics. Then it abandons this premise entirely, creates something new from nothing, and expects the audience to play along.

Keanu Reeves is surprisingly very good. He is the emotional grounding that the film desperately needed, and without this most honest attempt here, the movie would be a failure for him. Alice Eve is fairly okay, taking a slow and composed approach to her simple character. However Thomas Middleditch is horribly unlikeable and nauseating with a character that spends a lot of film looking down or away from the camera and ruining every scene he is in. John Ortiz doesn't seem to care about the very little writing for his character and almost appears to troll the movie.

The script is abominable and demands complete obedience to its ever changing ideas in order to enjoy the story. The screenplay, cinematography, use of colours and CGI are all good, but the heart of the movie is torn from the audience very early on, and instead the movie is replaced with the fake essence of other movies slapped in without true focus and direction. Plot holes are very evident in the final act, and there is a level of disrespect from the writers that I can't ignore.

Not well cast, and slightly unlikeable in parts, 'Pearl Harbour' is not Michael Bay's best work, and is a mix of unfunniness and lack of respect despite some interesting secondary characters.

Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale and Josh Hartnett all fail to engage with the film's manic and uncontrolled momentum, as the movie just doesn't seem interesting in holding a scene with any real heart or intention. Only Jon Voight is memorable and rises above the script.

Planes and the bombing of stationary ships does not make for particularly interesting action. A lot of the movement and camerawork is riddled with repetitiveness and confusion with quick cuts and overall poor cohesion. It's also too depressing, and not much fun.

Like mist itself, director Bertrand Tavernier creates one of least insightful and visionary detective movies ever made, yet within itself lies a few good qualities.

I've never been able to truly appreciate Tommy Lee Jones. He's a very busy and popular actor, yet I have found every performance from him failing to reach the top tier standard. Here he is given the primary runtime, and that's ultimately the second biggest problem for the movie, especially when he is outacted hugely by the magnificent John Goodman.

For the film's positives, the dialogue is good, and the screenplay and cinematography is fine, but critically nothing happens of any interest in the script or story and the unexciting execution doesn't make you care about anything.

With a broader vision and some subtly in parts, 'The Way of the Dragon' is Bruce Lee's second best film. The ensemble of cast are given a bit more to do and there is some humour thrown in that works. I can see and understand what Bruce Lee is trying to do with his direction of the movie, but the end result is a mixed bag.

His acting still isn't up to par, and that's a big problem. He's stiff in emotion and his character is rather forgettable. Ping-Ou Wei is more memorable largely due to his funny over the top facial expressions, although it makes English dubbing hard. The biggest negative is that incredible Chuck Norris is barely in it as a character, and he clearly had the acting chops to make a huge impression.

The martial arts, to a degree, is its saving grace, but the overall result is still quite mediocre and lacking in emotional layers.