Rating: MMMMM

Director: Edgar Wright
Starring: Michael Cera, Kieran Culkin, Chris Evans, Mary Elizabeth Winstead
Running time: 112 mins
Cert: 12A

Last night I was lucky enough to get into a free preview screening of Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, the new film from director Edgar Wright, who also co-wrote the screenplay of this comic book adaptation. That’s Edgar ‘Spaced’ Wright. Edgar Shaun of the Dead Wright. Edgar Hot Fuzz Wright.

So those were my reasons for being OH SO VERY excited about seeing this movie – I hadn’t read the comic book or kept up with the pre-production gossip online, instead I’ve just spent a couple of months treasuring the lovely warm prospect of a new Wright film, and hoping that makes me laugh halfway as much as his previous collaborations with the glorious Pegg and Frost team. As I’m still utterly buzzing 12 hours after watching it, any fans worried that the hop across the pond may have meant a move away from the quirky, charmingly silly humour his previous British comedies were characterised by- well they can just start getting ridiculously excited instead.

As you’d expect from the trailer, we follow Scott Pilgrim in each of his visually awesome battles with the seven demented exes. Afterwards, we all agreed that Michael Cera was absolutely the perfect match for Scott’s dialogue, which was often very, very funny, but made hysterical by Cera’s faltering, understated manner. So many throwaway lines keep coming back to me that on paper just wouldn’t, but were perfect little moments that took me by surprise. I never want to see him in another Judd Apatow comedy- they’re not bad, but it would ruin the memory of him in this infinitely more quick-witted film.

The supporting characters in Scott Pilgrim’s world are far more hilariously drawn that I had any right to expect. You’re whipped into the quick-fire sarcasm of his bandmate friends, (who are endearing and are refreshingly not teeth-grindingly quirky as in so many indie flicks) and this made me more than happy to suspend my disbelief when all the really silly stuff kicked off. And boy does it ever kick off.
The action fits surprisingly well into the snowy Toronto setting, provided you’ve left enough of your cynicism at the door. Rather than realistic martial arts, expect instead to be left gawking at the comic book-capery it does so well. As far as I could see, no actual blood and gore will be strewn about in the final edit, which is entirely in keeping with the tone of the film and something I’m quite relieved about. Gore is all well and good in its place, but I felt the increasingly tragic zombifications towards the end of Shaun of the Dead really jarred with the slapstick at times.

Another thing we were agreed on was that the humour was far less exclusive than other slacker comedies, or indeed action comedies we’ve all seen recently. While the whole film is essentially both a very funny computer game AND comic book up on the big screen, with in-jokes to tickle die-hard nerds of either persuasion, none of this stops anyone else laughing. It didn’t matter in the slightest if you didn’t know where a pixelated gaming sight gag came from (for there are many) came from, it was still funny to me and every other person who can’t even play Mariokart successfully. There aren’t jokes for the lads, and token ones for their girlfriends, there is just joke after joke that will leave both sexes weak and spluttering at the memory long after.

Scott Pilgrim sets out to combine action, comedy and romance and does a damn fine job of blending the three throughout so that no aspects feel tacked on. Romance does however suffer slightly from a lack of screen-time- although Scott battles each evil ex for the love of the apparently too-cool-for-anything Ramona, I did wonder what exactly was so great about her that he would get beaten up seven times in a row. But the relentless action and humour didn’t leave me much time to ponder this, or the other issue that has since started to niggle at me. Will anyone else agree with me that maybe having our hero fight the exes for ownership of his girl is a little off-colour? Feisty though she is, Ramona falls victim to the ‘Bella Swan paradox’- the story revolves around her, but it’s largely the blokes who get to do all the fun action stuff. There is a wicked girly fight (calm down) but Buffy this ain’t.

The music gives the fight scenes some real fire power in my opinion, and is as integral to the film as the offbeat ‘kerpow!’ and ‘zap!’ animations that pop up at just the right moments to punctuate the very ordinary Toronto. To those literally-minded/boring people who may complain that this, and the action sequences are too zany and unrealistic, I will say that the weirdness of Scott Pilgrim’s world all comes directly from how teenage and 20/30-something slacker gamers might view things from a sideways angle. They spend days and nights solving puzzles, arming up and beating each level, a pattern which is seamlessly integrated (God knows how, it’s an utter miracle) into this story. The end result is gorgeous on screen, even to my pixel-blind eyes.

Although Edgar Wright was sitting RIGHT THERE in the cinema as I left the post-preview screening market research interview, there was something I just couldn’t bring myself to go up to him and say. So here it is:

“Edgar Wright, your television and film work has given me so much joy and will be forever embedded in my life. So much so, that a like, if not a love for ‘Spaced’ is an essential requirement for any boyfriends, past and future- I am completely incapable of sleeping with someone who hasn’t seen ‘Spaced’ and laughed like a fool with me at it.”

Ahem. While I can’t yet declare the same obsession for Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, it has pretty much blown his previous films out of the water. The same amount of love and attention to tiny funny details has gone into the film that made ‘Spaced’ so infinitely re-watchable. If Edgar Wright does not become a very rich man there is something very wrong with the world’s film viewing public.

Rating: MMMM

Review of ‘geezer’ director Guy Ritchie’s adaptation of Arthur Conan Doyle’s classic character (and the world’s most famous detective) the inimitable Sherlock Holmes.

Director: Guy Ritchie
Starring: Robert Downey, Jr., Jude Law, Mark Strong, Kelly Reilly, Rachel McAdams
Running time: 128 mins

Infamous British gangster-thriller director Guy Ritchie’s take on the world’s most famous detective may not be the most faithful or accurate depiction of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Victorian detective, but his new Sherlock Holmes film is likely to be the most fun.
At the point in which the film begins, our heroes, the eponymous Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and Doctor John Watson (Jude Law) are soon to be separated from being London’s brilliant and unrivaled ‘consulting detective’ partners by Watson’s impending engagement to his love Mary (Kelly Reilly). However, before the pair are to part ways, one more case must be solved – one that requires all of Holmes’ remarkable powers of deduction, observational skills and helping hands of Dr Watson. It is a case unlike any Holmes has ever confronted, apparently defying the laws of logic and science, one that terrorises London in a chain of strange and ritualistic murders and one that is seemingly orchestrated from beyond the grave by the recently deceased Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong).

The first point of praise for Ritchie’s film is that the plot of Sherlock Holmes is well conceived and structured, being complex and intriguing enough to be a believable case that Holmes and Watson have to solve, but straightforward enough for the audience not to be lost. Some parts are messy but never confusing, and the film as a whole is so damn entertaining that even the odd plot contrivance can be forgiven. There is a wonderful tension between the scientific and the gothic, capturing the tone and flavour of two Victorian phenomenons, coupled with a glimpse of the forward march of progress so omnipresnent in the late nineteenth century. The script is well written, clever and funny, is pleasingly lacking in the “me old china” -isms of Ritchie’s repertoir and perhaps more importantly, captures the brilliance and intelligence of Conan Doyle’s original character.

As is to be expected from a Guy Ritchie movie (in the face of his previous work, Lock, Stock, Snatch, Revolver), there is a certain amount of fisticuffs and bare-knuckle fighting in Sherlock Holmes which some might feel incongruous with the tone of the original source material. Surprisingly, however the inclusion of the violence is not to the detriment of the film – the scenes where Holmes takes on a prizefighter in a boxing match are coupled with a voice-over of him explaining his punches and techniques, presenting the violence as another facet of his detective skills.

In terms of performances, the central pair are without a doubt the stars of the show. Robert Downey, Jr. as Holmes is excellent, intensely likeable and very charming. Likewise, Jude Law as Watson is also very good. The two together are brilliant, exuding charisma and a fantastic physical comedy that elevates the film above being simply entertaining and makes in out-and-out fun – their bickering ‘old married couple’ act is very well done, to the point where the relationship becomes the heart of the film and the mystery plays second fiddle – this is not a criticism however as the friendship dynamic between the two men worked so well, being funny, poignant and enjoyable.
Mark Strong as the villanous Lord Blackwood is deliciously evil and suitably gothic but never descending into camp devilry, maintaining a malevolent sensibility that is genuinely creepy. The only piece of characterisation that perhaps doesn’t work as well as the rest is Rachel McAdams as Holmes’ female foil and ‘love interest’ despite her being a crucial part of the film’s climax.

Sherlock Holmes is a good, solid, enjoyable and hugely entertaining action blockbuster that packs as many laughs as it does punches – Downey, Jr. and Law’s comic timing is fabulous. Go see.

Rating: MMMM

Rating: MMMM

Review of new film from niche director Spike Jonze, his adaptation and big-screen realisation of one of the world’s most popular children’s books.

Director: Spike Jonze
Starring: Max Records, Catherine Keener, James Gandolfini, Catherine O’Hara, Forest Whitaker
Running time: 101 mins

Spike Jonze’s film, Where The Wild Things Are is under a lot of pressure, being the big-screen adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s 1963 picture-book of the same name, hailed as one of the most beloved children’s books of all time. But lovers of the book should have no fear as what Jonze has produced is an interesting, entertaining and thoroughly excellent piece of fantasy fare that while not necessarily following the book word for word (this is hardly surprising, given the length of the book and its limited word count), captures the essence and spirit of the source material. Jonze crafts a convincing and illuminating backstory for our hero Max, wearer of Wolf Pyjamas and soon to be king of all the Wild Things, introducing us to his mother (Catherine Keener) and hinting an element of dysfunctionality at play in the family unit – thus creating a believable and solid grounding for Max’s flight of fantasy and subsequent emotional journey.

A frustrated and alienated child, Max has a fight with his mother one evening and takes to the streets to escape his domestic troubles, perilously journeying by sea to a far away land of his imagination. For Max however (and the audience), this new world is completely real, presenting new joys and heartache not dissimilar to the ones he left behind. Once in the land of the Wild Things, Max stumbles upon some strange creatures with terrible teeth and terrible claws, most notably the statuesque Carol (voiced by Tony Soprano himself, James Gandolfini). The Wild Things, though wary of Max at first, soon accept him as a friend and elect him King, joining with him to build a massive structure where they can all live together (having destroyed their houses in a rather boisterous and violent game) as a rather unconventional and furry family group. However, as with the home environment that Max ran from, the Wild Things have their own personal problems and anxieties that hinder perfect social cohesion – Judith’s (Catherine O’Hara) constant downbeat mutterings paired with the possible romantic tension between Carol and KW (Lauren Ambrose) create a rather strained atmosphere between the Wild Things, which starts to effect Max’s role as King.

In Where The Wild Things Are, Spike Jonze has created a beautiful, enchanting film that explores the joys and tragedies of childhood convincingly, without condescension or pandering to purists. The story may have been altered a little, but those tweaks and changes only serve to make the spellbinding original story even more interesting and exciting. The acting from young Max Records is excellent, as are the voice talents who give the Wild Things their unique and charismatic voices, in particular James Gandolfini as Carol. In terms of cinematography, the film is also very well produced, the colour palette reflecting enough of the book’s illustrations with a few frames of lens flare that suit the tone of the piece (and link nicely with Max’s terrifying realisation that the sun will eventually die) very well. The Wild Things themselves, by virtue of being actors in big hairy suits, have a wonderfully physical presence, a masterstroke on the part of Jonze – a wonderfully palpable quality that CG creature design could not and probably never will be able to achieve.  Also notable and worthy of praise is the excellent soundtrack, provided by Carter Burwell with songs by Karen O (of indie rock band Yeah Yeah Yeahs fame) which perfectly suits the moments of joy, wonder and childlike fun presented in the film.

Where The Wild Things Are is entertaining, moving and beautifully breathtaking film about childhood, its joys, traumas and wonders – a must-see film of 2009.

Rating: MMMM

Rating: MMM+

Delayed review of director Chris Weitz’s The Twilight Saga: New Moon, the second instalment in the 4-part series of  the teen vampire romance, based on the novels by Stephenie Meyer.

Director: Chris Weitz
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Michael Sheen
Running time:130 mins

In the last Twilight film, star cross’d lover Bella Swan made a request of her vampire boyfriend, teen dream Edward Cullen, to change her from her state of “fragile little human” to one of vampiric immortal. Edward declines, reluctant to end Bella’s life for her and transform her into a “monster”. It is this desire and denial between the two (coupled with Edward’s uncertainty about how wise it is to carry on the relationship, based on earnest concerns for Bella’s safety) that creates palpable tension at the beginning of New Moon, eventually reaching crisis point after a tiny papercut at her birthday party puts Bella’s life in danger. Edward consequently breaks up with her, leaves the town of Forks, apparently out of Bella’s life forever.

As one might be able to predict, given the level of eye-gazing and soul searching our lovers engaged in during the first film and the level of besotted infatuation between them, Bella does not take the break-up well. In fact, to say that is an understatement – she enters a downward spiral of what can only be described as depression and near mental breakdown. Socially alienated and tortured by horriffic nightmares, Bella is a lost soul. That is until she is reawoken by friend Jacob Black. By spending time with Jacob, Bella’s emotional healing begins – until a dark secret Jacob is harbouring threatens their friendship.

In New Moon, Chris Weitz has crafted a faithful adaptation of Stephenie Meyer’s novel of the same name but a film which sadly maintains the book’s langorous quality and lack of pace, slowing down and picking up in an awkward fashion, exemplified in the film’s anti-climactic third act in Italy (however, this is arguably the fault of the poorly structured source material). However, the film opens well, picking up soon after the events of  Twilight and makes good use of flashback footage of the first film, using Bella’s silvery scar and other reference points to link thematically and narratively with Catherine Hardwicke’s initial outing. However, a detail in which Weitz has done the film a disservice is his decision to change the film’s colour palette; Twilight is shot in a cool, glassy blue, capturing the striking beauty and coldness of both the Cullen family and the film’s location of Washington state (played in reality by Portland, Oregon).

Weitz’s New Moon departs from the frosty colours of Twilight to warm, golden hues which give the pale vampire make-up and contact lenses a garish theatricality and falseness – see above picture of Robert Pattinson’s chalky complexion. New Moon also uses a different composer for its score, which again changes the tone of things – gone is the lilting and decorative piano theme of ‘Bella’s Lullaby’ and in place is a fairly nondescript score, a real shame as there could have been room for linking themes, creating a sense of a whole ’saga’ (as the film is so reticently marketed). We must acknowledge that Lord of the Rings this isn’t, and we will get no such musical continuity here. The featured songs in the film however are excellent, with great tunes from Death Cab For Cutie (who provide the film’s promo single ‘Meet Me on the Equinox’), Bon Iver, Thom Yorke and Muse.

Another area where the film succeeds is in its casting and main players. Kristen Stewart as Bella is very good, anchoring the story convincingly and sensitively. As Edward, Robert Pattinson doesn’t make much of an appearance in the film, but when onscreen is credibly haunting and of course, achingly gorgeous. But Pattinson is not to be outdone in the looks department by Taylor Lautner who is really the film’s show stealer. At all times believable, endearing and generating many scenes of palpable sexual and emotional tension between Bella and the newly ‘buff’ Jacob – for his role, Lautner bulked up considerably, a fact that it is impossible not to notice, spending so much time bare-chested, cinemagoers will undoubtedly leave with his rippling abs burned into their retinas. The first de-shirting is one of many that will cause more than a few giggles, and is something many critics will knock, but as Mark Kermode argues, the film clearly knows its target market (the teenage female) and really there is nothing wrong with the boys getting a little bit naked in face of the plethora of degrading female nudity seen accross the global media.

With more action, more melodrama, more staring and more angst, New Moon would seem on the face of it to be more of the same, but really this second episode has lost some of the quality and fun of the original, sadly making it less enjoyable as a result. Nevertheless, a solid effort that will please fans and Twi-hards alike and guaranteed to be box-office gold.

Rating: MMM+

Director: Alex Proyas
Starring: Brandon Lee, Ernie Hudson, Rochelle Davis, Anna Thomson
Running time: 97mins

Simply put, The Crow is a revenge tragedy from the mid 1990s that is more famous for the tragic and untimely death of its star Brandon Lee (son of Bruce, killed accidentally by a faulty prop gun) than for the film itself. Based on James O’Barr’s original graphic novel of the same name, the film tells the story of Eric Draven, who rises from the dead a year later after he and his girlfriend were murdered (on Devil’s Night, the night preceding Halloween) to wreak revenge on their killers. Guided by a mysterious crow, Draven goes on a rampage of violence that boasts one grisly death after another, signing the bodies with his talisman’s winged outline. One by one he crosses them off his list, but is impeded along the way by the new resident crime lord who does not take kindly to the systematic slaughter of his associates.

The film draws on the gothic genre with references to Edgar Allen Poe and features a delicious show-down in a church, yet despite its dark tone and even darker atmosphere and palette, The Crow is essentially a story of love – a backstory of Draven and fiancée Shelly is told through flashback where they are painted beautifully as a couple very much in love, brutally murdered the day before they were to be married – there are touching and poetic moments throughout, including a scene where Draven tearfully retrieves his lover’s engagement ring from a white-trash pawn shop. The film also boasts an intriguing sub-plot in alienated young teen Sarah who turned to Shelly (when alive) as a surrogate parent after being more or less abandoned by her heroin addict mother.

Sadly, as with River Phoenix and his role as Chris Chambers in Stand By Me, the late Brandon Lee’s performance adds a further haunting element to an already dark film. Had he lived, Lee would arguably have built on the talent so clearly on display here. As Eric Draven, he gives a commanding performance with a great deal of presence and energy. The film is dedicated to him and his partner Eliza, and is a fitting tribute to a young actor so full of promise. Gothic, violent, dark and cool with a killer soundtrack to boot, The Crow is a cult hit that should rank among the best of graphic novel adaptations – and as the perfect Halloween film.

Review of the adaptation of  Roald Dahl’s children’s book Fantastic Mr. Fox which opened the 53rd London Film Festival on 14th October 2009.

Director: Wes Anderson
Starring: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Willem Dafoe, Owen Wilson
Running time: 87 mins

Fantastic Mr. Fox marks the mainstream breakthrough for director Wes Anderson, more famed for low-key cult hits such as Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums. In this adaptation of Roald Dahl’s beloved children’s book of the same name,  Anderson brings his usual eccentric, quirky style to the source material, delivering a film that succeeds on almost every level.

George Clooney voices the clever and charming newspaper columnist Mr Fox, who dreams of him and his family moving up in the world, quite literally, from an underground foxhole to a home inside a tree. Here he enlists help from real estate solicitor Mr Badger (voiced by Bill Murray) and subsequently settles into a lovely new home with wife Felicity (Meryl Streep), son Ash (Jason Schwartzman of Rushmore) and prodigy nephew Kristofferson (Eric Chase Anderson). However, after relocating the family to new residence, Mr Fox nostalgically remembers his thieving days as a professional poacher and pines for the life of danger and excitement he once led. Consequently, our hero hatches a plan for “one last big job”, aided in part by Kylie the possum to steal from the “nastiest, meanest farmers in the valley”, Boggis, Bunce and Bean. However, one heist leads to another and pretty soon Mr Fox, his family and neighbours land themselves in one big heap of trouble.

From the get-go, Wes Anderson’s Fantastic Mr. Fox is a fast-paced, charming and entertaining feast for the eyes and the heart. Visually stunning, the stop-motion animation used to create the world of the film and its inhabitants is flawless, perfectly capturing every nuance of the story (and the small changes in plot that Anderson has neatly added). In particular, the scene in which Mr Fox fights with the evil Rat (Willem Dafoe) is amazing (with the characters’ silhouettes illuminated by intermittent flashes of lightning), as is a shared moment between Mr and Mrs Fox in front of a waterfall. It is a testament to the charm of the film that where the animation could seem contrived and somewhat dodgy, there are instead endearing eccentricities – smoke being created from what appears to be a billowing mass of grey cotton wool.

Packed full of great comedy hi-jinks, character moments (where Owen Wilson’s Coach Skip explains the rules of cricket/rounders/baseball hybrid sport ‘whack bat’ is just priceless) and genuinely witty one liners, Fantastic Mr. Fox has all the ingredients of a truly excellent and entertaining film. The only minor drawbacks for this critic are the intertitles which appear throughout the film, far too fast for young children to be able to read in time and which more importantly, announce moments of drama which would be better left to the surprise of the audience. Sadly the use of these titles sells some moments of conflict and suspense rather short, and key set-pieces lose both their impact and poignancy.

However, this is a small price to pay in an otherwise perfect film. The voice talent is exceptional, the animation and visual style is great, the dialogue is superb. Those put off by the film apparently being ‘for kids’, for shame. Fantastic Mr. Fox is film that is (unashamed use of the pun) truly fantastic, and fantastic for all.

Rating: MMMM+

On the sofa with the 2008 glossy adaptation of Noel Coward’s 1920s set comedy of errors, Easy Virtue.

Director: Stephan Elliot
Starring: Jessica Biel, Colin Firth, Kristin Scott Thomas, Ben Barnes
Running time: 92 mins

Based on Noel Coward’s original play, Easy Virtue is set in late 1920s England and sees young John Whittaker (Ben Barnes) bring his blonde bombshell new wife Larita (Jessica Biel) home to meet his family. The couple are greeted somewhat frostily however, as Mrs Whittaker senior (Kristin Scott Thomas) does not approve of her son’s choice of bride – what ensues is a tense battle between the two women with unexpected consequences.

The film’s narrative follows a neat three act structure, with some great sight gags, poignant scenes and as one might expect from a Coward-scripted drama, dialogue of the highest wit and calibre. The costumes are perfectly designed and created (Larita’s blouse and trouser combinations in particular), with the photography subtle and dramatic in turn. The production value is high throughout the film, with the exception however being the film’s music. Instead of a low-key score with traditional and realistic select tunes from the likes of Cole Porter (these are in attendance, although few in number), instead we are ‘treated’ to songs modern songs orchestrated in a 1920s style – Tom Jones’s ‘Sex Bomb’ for instance, which as soon as one recognises that familiar melody, becomes increasingly irritating. These numbers effectively ruin what would otherwise be a solid and credible musical score, with some tunes sung credibly well by members of the cast (Jessica Biel sings ‘Mad about the Boy’ to great aplomb).

In comparison with some dodgy choices with Easy Virtue’s music, Stephan Elliot must be praised for his casting, as both Kristin Scott Thomas and Jessica Biel are perfect in their respective roles as the stubborn battle-axe mother Mrs Whittaker and glamorous American Larita. Biel presents Larita as a complex and intriguing character with hidden depths and a spirited, passionate past, whereas Scott Thomas demonstrates again her fantastic range and ability to transform what might be two-dimensional roles into well developed characters. However, as Mr Whittaker, Colin Firth seems uncharacteristically lacking in presence, leaving Coward’s fabulously witty dialogue to fall flat at times – a real waste of such good excellent source material. Similarly Ben Barnes, while looking very much the part as the gorgeous young hero, lacks depth. His two younger sisters in comparison are played very well by Katherine Parkinson (Jen from the IT Crowd) and Kimberley Nixon, creating a wonderful chorus effect when coupled with Scott Thomas’s matriarch.

Easy Virtue is a beautifully shot and crafted film, with some good performances, a very well structured plot (undoubtedly due to Coward’s theatrical text) and enough laughs to keep audiences smiling after the credits roll – but is unlikely however to be as memorable as other period pieces of recent memory.

Rating: MMM

Review of the latest film of the Harry Potter franchise, sixth film Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince which sees Harry and Dumbledore unite to search into Voldemort’s past in an effort to discover secrets that will lead them to destroy him.

Director: David Yates
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Michael Gambon, Alan Rickman, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson
Running time: 153 mins

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is the second film about the boy wizard to be directed by David Yates (his first outing in the franchise being film #5, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix) with films #1 and #2 helmed by Chris Columbus, the third by Alfonso Cuaron and the fourth by Mike Newell. Interestingly, where the second film suffered with a lack of freshness by Columbus once more taking the reins, Half-Blood Prince also suffers.

But just where the film falls down seems on the surface hard to pinpoint. On the whole (with a few glaring exceptions) the performances are reasonably good, the production value and visual effects are faultless, the dialogue is acceptable and for those wishing to pick holes in the book-to-screen transition, there is little to criticise. Where the problem comes however, is in the film’s pace which lacks dynamism and any sense of rhythm. Some scenes concentrate heavily on the mystery surrounding the identity of the Half-Blood Prince (which Harry comes across in an old school textbook) while others neglect this part of the plot completely. Quidditch seems to feature heavily, which seems incongruous to the film’s advertised tone – the franchise getting darker as Voldemort’s power grows. It must be said that far too much of the film is given over to the pangs of teenage love and raging hormones – all of which are important elements in the source material but here take up far too many scenes.

Having said that the performances are fairly good, this is only true of the adult actors and a very small number of their younger counterparts. Daniel Radcliffe is as ever painfully hit-and-miss, with some scenes feeling cringingly awkward whereas others are fairly good (the scene involving the lucky potion Felix Felicis in particular) . In comparison, Jim Broadbent  is excellent as new Potions teacher Professor Horace Slughorn, as is Michael Gambon as the illustrious Albus Dumbledore. Rupert Grint continues to demonstrate brilliant comic timing and excellent performance skills in his reprisal of Ron Weasley. Sadly, as ever, Emma Watson struggles in her portrayal of Hermione Granger as she has done in the previous films. However, she fares better than Bonnie Wright (Ginny Weasley) who is extremely poor – her relationship and ‘blossoming romance’ with Harry withers on screen with a complete lack of chemistry. However, the two young actors as the young Tom Riddle (at ages 11 and 16 respectively), Hero Fiennes-Tiffin and Frank Dillane are superb, with the two performances maintaining a tension between sinister and eerie and a creepy seductiveness.

Other elements of the film are also good, the visual effects in particular – the inky thoughts tipping into the Pensieve are excellent, as is the fire wielded by Dumbledore near the film’s climax. However, there is an inescapable feeling of mediocrity running more or less throughout the entire film which cannot be evaded even by the aforementioned firy adventures of Harry and Dumbledore and their consequences. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is perhaps the weakest in the canon since the excellence of film number four – and sadly the curse of keeping the same director is set to continue with Yates at the helm of the franchise’s final instalments.

Rating: MMM

Rating: MM

The first review originally written for Maz’s Movie Memorandum, of Michael Bay’s sequel to his 2007 summer box-office smash, Transformers.

Director: Michael Bay
Starring: Shia La Beouf, Megan Fox, Josh Duhamel, John Turturro
Running Time: 150 mins

As with most Michael Bay films and its predecessor, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is expectedly a triumph of style over substance. The film opens with a frenetic action sequence which gives way to some pleasing lighter scenes, involving the loveable (if somewhat unlikely) hero Sam Witwicky and his family. However, these scenes and other more character-driven moments seem few and far between in a film that is almost entirely composed of explosions and clouds of scattered dust.

Having said this though, the film is good solid summer fare, with a few witty lines here and there and enough charm to keep the audience interested. Where the film falls down however, is in the deployment of a troublesome third act, in which the film loses all sense of pace (the film feels 45 minutes too long) and in fact, narrative trajectory; it takes a monologue of exposition from a new old-man transformer (found and re-awoken by the protagonists at a visit to the Smithsonian Museum, of Night at the Museum 2 fame) to make things clear – a lack of clarity and obscure plot that this film shares with the original, something that Bay and his writers clearly haven’t managed to improve upon, despite a seemingly infinite budget. This, it appears has been spent entirely on visual effects, all of which are admittedly stunning, but are nothing we haven’t seen before.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen demonstrates that in a franchise, both premise and characters need an element of freshness to really succeed. Shia La Boeuf returns as Sam, a likeable enough character, but with far less to do than in the first Transformers film which certainly gave La Beouf more scope to develop the role. Perennial men’s magazine favourite Megan Fox also reprises her role of Sam’s love interest Mikaela, but seems to appear only in the capacity of the token gorgeous girl, wearing skimpy shorts and running around screaming for her boyfriend – her only saving grace being that she can hot-wire a car.

In this second outing of the Transformers franchise there seems to be far less dialogue between characters and much more time given to gratuitous action sequences with more transformers than one can really keep up with. And keeping up appears a hard task – in fact truthfully, staying focused is harder, as the film really does suffer from being just that bit too long. In all, for a summer blockbuster there is enough to keep audiences happy, but only just.

Rating: MM (add another if you’re a fan of the toys/cartoon)