2009

Wow, this film just blew me away. I knew I wanted to see it when I heard about the cast but after not hearing much about it for a while I put the viewing off for a while. Kinda wish I hadn't.
I don't know what went wrong with the marketing on this film but it really is such a shame. I do hope this film won't fall under the radar and continue to be ignored by many people who would really enjoy it.
It's a quirky comedy set in the late 80s about a college graduate who is forced to start working at a local amusement park over the summer when he can't find work doing anything else. The hours are long, the job is boring and the pay is rubbish but he while working there, he discovers things about himself and some very valuable life lessons.
Jesse Eisenberg was completely unknown to me before I watched this film. I don't recall seeing him in anything else until now and if I have he didn't catch my attention in any way. But with this I found him rather impressive. His character is very down to earth and one of those nice guys you know you could be friends with because there is just nothing to dislike about him.
Although Eisenberg impressed me, it was Kristen Stewart that won it for me. She's a terrific actress and everyone knows about her new found fame with the Twilight series, but for me it has always been her small films with interesting characters and solid performances that result in me being unable to say no to anything she happens to be in. She plays Eisenberg's new love interest at the park but she's seeing another guy secretly and she's also going through quite a lot of emotional stuff with her family. It's easy to say she's a bit of a mess and all of her problems don't exactly make it easy for Eisenberg to get to know her the way he wants to.
Ryan Raynolds seemed like an odd choice for the character. He seems very out of place in the film. There is nothing wrong with his performance, he does it very well, but I personally think another, less generic actor would have been a much better choice.
Bill Hader is so funny. He plays the owner of the park and every single one of his scenes are just hilarious. Perfect choice for the character and he has great chemistry with all the young actors involved.
It makes me sad that more people have not seen this as it is so good and totally worth your time. I hope it becomes one of those indie films that everyone has heard about because it would be a shame if it failed to get the recognition it deserved.

Okay, so some people hate it, some people love it, some people think it should have been better. Personally I thought the whole thing was pretty good but it had obvious flaws that I suppose in some ways, for the film, really couldn't have been helped.
I've yet to read the graphic novel, but after seeing this it has interested me, so perhaps at some point I will get round to reading it so I can do a bit of comparing.
The characters in the film are all amazingly written and the actors involved were all great choices. I don't think I could pick out one that let the side down. I can however pick out the actor that shawn the most out of the group , and that would have to be Jackie Earle Haley. He is such a terrific actor and i've only just discovered his work after first watching Little Children and then this. His performances are always so captivating and it's clear that after these two major films, the guy is going places. This was also his second time working with Patrick Wilson and I think as a pair they do a really good job with some brilliant chemistry as it's clear they are friends off screen as well.
I won't go through the rest of the actors but they really were all brilliant.
The thing that bugs me about the film was partly the length. Not that I have a problem sitting for three hours and throughout the film, there wasn't one moment where I was bored or not entertained. But I felt that even at that time length, they were trying to squeeze in as much as possible. Someone mentioned this film should have been a tv series. I don't think I agree with that as that would mean losing out on some of those amazing action sequences and losing out on the gore that gave it the NC-17 rating. I do however think they could have split it up and got a couple of films out of it. Even if they released them at the same time, like Kill Bill. Made to be one film, but released as two so as to fit everything in.
The plot of the film was brilliant although complicated, and at the beginning i was asking myself am I going to understand this even though i've not read the book. Fortunately I did. Once it gathered momentum everything became a lot clearer. I do believe they changed the ending a lot, which I would like to know more about by reading the book. Other than that, i'm aware the producers and script writers stayed very close to the original plot, probably so as not to piss of the fanboys.
It's one you're going to have to make your own mind up about. Everyone seems to have different opinions about it.

I'm yet another person who is new to the Star Trek franchise. I don't believe i've watched an episode all the way through and i've not seen any of the films. So this review isn't about how they stayed faithful to the original series or anything like that because I wouldn't have the foggiest if they had or not. All I know is that the casting was excellent and I loved every second I spent watching this action packed sci-fi film.
It's been quite a while since a decent sci-fi film was released and I think the idea to reboot this franchise and bring it up to date for modern audiences was a fantastic idea. When you say Star Trek most people associate it with geeky fan boys and just something that is generally not cool. With this film however, they've made it accessible to everyone. There is nothing geeky and cliched about this film. What I think it's success is down to, is that they kept it simple. You did get your back story but they kept that minimal. I love J. J. Abrams for not reiterating things over and over again as some films are guilty of. The plot was very much straight to the point with no complications at all. This is usually the falling point of a film when they try to cram in as much as possible so they have supporting stories for an sequels. I love it when they don't feel it necessary to do this as it makes the film flow better and makes sure anyone that is new to the story doesn't feel overwhelmed by lots of new information.
The performances in it are all excellent. I'll start with the one exception which really pissed me off. Winona Ryder. I honestly have nothing against her, i'm probably one of the few people on the planet that actually likes her. She had about two lines in the whole film and only had two scenes and yet every time I saw her she just annoyed me. She seemed out of place and rather pointless. It astounds me that anyone can give such a bad performance when they have such little screen time. I think she's probably the only flaw in the whole film.
Chris Pine wouldn't have been my first choice as Kirk but he really blew me away. Everything i've seen him in up until this film, he never really struck me as a capable actor but I was completely wrong. He was perfect for the role and really pulled the whole thing off, which can't have been easy with lots of pressure from fans and trying to walk in Shatner's shoes. I think he pulled it off because he didn't try to imitate Shatner, he just made it his own.
Zachary Quinto was a brilliant choice as Spock and it is rather scary just how alike he and Nimoy look. He really passes as a younger version of him.
Eric Bana was completely unrecognizable and I didn't even know it was him until the film ended. Which for someone like him is probably a good thing because he's left quite a few bad impressions with some horrible films in recent years.
I always knew that Scotty would be someone that would annoy me because they wouldn't actually choose a Scottish actor and the accent would be dreadful. I gotta say I can't fault Simon Pegg. I think the guy is awesome. His accent was bloody awful but I'll forgive him just due to the fact that he made me laugh so much. His delivery of his lines was just spot on.
John Coo was a weird addition to the cast but he did very well and I have a little bit more respect for him now.
Anton Yechin is a brilliant young actor who i've seen in quite a few things recently. After this i'm pretty sure he's going places. His performance was one of the best in the film and so memorable. And I was pleased they chose a Russian actor for the character so we didn't get any dodgy accents with him as well.
Personally I loved it. I have a Trekky friend who hated it. It's one people will have mixed opinions on so you'll just have to check it out to see what you think.

You will have no idea how long i've waited to see this film. So, i'll just have to tell you. Around 3 years now. Seems like a long time to obsess about seeing a film, yes.
Sci-fi films have been pretty thin in recent years. Very few original ideas and the ones that do get made there are only a select few that are any good.
You'd think I was a massive sci-fi fan, i'm not really, I've just been feeling let down about the lack of material the studios have been producing on the subject.
Personally I thought this low budget indie flick produced by the BBC and HBO was excellent. It did everything that a low budget sci-fi film should aim to do. It didn't over do it with special effects that turn out to look rubbish. In fact, special effects were very minimal in this movie. And I liked that. It didn't need all that extra stuff to put across it's point. And that is pretty admirable in a time when CGI is thrown at just about any movie that will take it.
The premise of the film is about three friends with rubbish jobs at the local theme park. Two of them are 'nerds' as they like to use in the film, and the other is just an average lad who thinks his friends need to grow up and get a life. The whole film is pretty much shot in their local pub and specifically around the gents bathroom where a rip in time is causing havoc as the guys try to not only get back to their own time but catch up with time as well.
As the title suggests the movie raises all the different issues that are associated with time travel, i.e. the grandfather dilemma and the chaos theory. All three guys tackle these different problems, trying to make sure they don't change their pasts.
I love Chris O'Dowd, he's done a lot of work on British television so if your American it's unlikely that you'd have heard of him. But he really is a tremendously funny guy. I found it slightly distracting that they made him tone down his Irish accent as if you ever hear him speak normally, it is blatantly obvious he's trying to stifle it. Despite that, he does a brilliant job with a role that doesn't rely so much on comedy.
Anna Faris makes a nice addition to the cast as a woman from the future. I think it's obvious that to make a British film sell in America and appeal to the American audiences, you have to have one of their own in the film. And because I love Faris so much I won't really complain about it. I love that they also joke about this as well with O'Dowd's character pointing out that everyone in the future is American. Which was bloody funny on many different levels.
I highly recommend this time travel flick to anyone who is feeling let down by the lack of sci-fi on the shelves lately. I don't see how you can be disappointed by this one.

Everything I wanted it to be. Everyone gives this film a lot of stick but personally I thought it was just as good as the very first in the series. Yes that wasn't exactly excellent but they're definatly guilty pleasure films. Fast cars, fast women and Vin Diesel. What more could you want from an action film. I can't think of anything.
I thought it was brilliant that they managed to get back the cast from the first film. That's why I was always disappointed by the other two films. It just wasn't Fast and Furious without Vin Diesel. It was just Paul Walker attempting to carry a film by himself, which he just cannot do. The guy just doesn't have enough charisma. Diesel on the other hand has shit loads of it and makes this film just awesome.
I think what they did in the beginning of the film was very brave. You'll know what i'm talking about if you've seen it, if not you'll just have to go watch it to find out. Anyway, it was a brave move and something I think they pulled off very well. It gave the film a new edge and also made the viewer believe that the producers were not afraid to do the unexpected and all bets were off. To begin with I felt that this sort of gave away the ending to a much greater degree. I always find the endings to films like this are pretty predictable. Luckily that's something I can get over just so I can enjoy the ride. But when the end came it didn't happen. I was expecting Diesel's character to be killed off. It made sense because of what happened to him in the beginning. Like his journey was over and he didn't need to hang around anymore kind of thing. Although they didn't go for this option, the one they chose was pretty good. It was very open so I wouldn't be surprised that if in a few years they decided that they wanted to make another. For me, I would welcome it with open arms if it was half as good as this one. Can't you tell I like cheesy action flicks.

Been looking forward to this film for a long time now. Can't say I was disappointed but I don't think it was quite as good as the da Vinci Code. Unlike most people I actually preferred da Vinci the book to the Angels and Demons book. I guess I just preferred the plot points that Dan Brown used in it. I love the subject matter of both books and have studied it for quite a few years as well.
I do have quite a few issues with this film that sort of hindered my viewing of it. I understand that when writing the screenplay, you do have to change things and cut things out, but I feel they went a little overboard with that on this project. There was just so much that changed that could quite have easily of been left in. I didn't like that they chose to ignore the fact that the Scientist who was killed in the beginning was actually her father. They didn't gain anything from leaving it out, they only lost what would have been a greater connection between the characters. Also that they decided that it would be good to add in the fact that if she got to the canister when it had more than five minutes of battery life left, she would be able to replace them. This was completely point as it's fairly obvious to anyone that she isn't actually going to make it in time, so why bother with that. In the book it was made very clear that even if they did find it, it was unlikely there would be enough time to get the canister back to lab to recharge the batteries. Stupid much, I think so. There was a lot more that changed as well but I won't go into it incase you haven't read the book.
I suppose if you are unfamiliar with the book then these things wouldn't be an issue at all and I don't see why you wouldn't find this film as enjoyable as the last.
Tom Hanks is brilliant as always. I love the guy so really can't fault him in anything he does.
Ewan McGregor annoyed me throughout. The guy should stop kidding himself about the accents. He just can't do them. His performance wasn't terrible. It could have been better. What would have been a good move, would be not to hire him for the character in the first place. I don't know why they thought he would be a good choice.
Although it has its faults, it's still worth checking out as it is a good summer blockbuster with loads of suspense and a great plot to it.

Didn't really know what to expect from this but the cast seemed interesting so I thought I'd give it a shot.
It's certainly a weird one. It's a character study film about a group of teenagers who lose the person closest to them. As a group of misfits and underachievers their teacher was the only one that saw them for who they really were. He acted as their only hope for their worlds. It is all centered around the days before the 1980's Challengers Space Shuttle. Which for anyone that doesn't know already, was where NASA decided to put an ordinary American citizen into space. This just happened to be a female teacher from an average American high school. The tragic thing about the story is that the shuttle malfunctioned and blew up not long after take off. A reporter for a New York newspaper is send to cover the shuttle launch in the town the teacher works. It is here he discovers the death of an old friend and begins to get closer to the group of kids that his friend had such an impact on.
His initial intentions are to write a story, not about the shuttle launch, but on these group of teenagers and the man that gave them faith. While their school celebrates a hero in the making the teenagers are wondering why know one seems to care about the death of a man who was so important to them. As the story progresses lies are told and some characters are revealed to be very deceitful. However, through all the lies told and the troubles they each face, they are all proven to be thoughtful people and what they want most is for people to recognise a man that deserves it.
For all the actors involved, it's not very conventional and far from what you'd expect. Steven Coogan plays the reporter and very well might I add. It's good to see that he has it in him to play a more serious role and that he won't get stuck in comedy no matter how good he happens to be with it.
Hilary Duff makes a great switch from her usual brainless comedies. I couldn't say her performance was amazing, or anything close, but it was solid and at least proved that she is capable of something more. Hopefully we'll get to see more like this from her.
For me though the star of the film would have to be Olivia Thirlby. In her career so far she has been very much, in a supporting role. And although her character in this wouldn't be considered a main, she isn't exactly in the background either. Her character is very much pivotal to the plot development on more than one occasion. It's great to see her making her way up and I love that she does cute little indie films like this. I can really see her going places in the near future. She's one to watch.
Another terrific performance from Josh Peck, who just keeps getting better and better. I've seen quite a few of his films recently and it's clear he has a lot of talent.
This film probably isn't for everybody but if you're into films that explore the human condition and make you think deep about the characters, then you might wanna check it out.

I'm a sucker for most things Jennifer Aniston, I think it probably links back to my addiction to friends. And that's probably a good thing because she pretty much only plays her friends' character in different situations. So when I heard a few plots points for this film I got a little excited. The character described didn't really have a lot of Rachel in it and although that wasn't completely the case when I came to see this, she did manage to keep away from that stereotype a little, which is better than not at all.
The film is mainly about Steve Zahn's character who works in his mother's motel. When stunning art saleswoman, Aniston, turns up for business in town he is immediately taken with her and proceeds to pursue her. Zahn is a terrific actor and everything i've seen him in just proves that he can tackle any character he is given and pull it off very impressively. This is no different. His character is a loner and borders the socially awkward category. In his home town he doesn't seem to have any friends and is only ever seen speaking with his parents. When he travels away to find Aniston and convince her to be with him he does make one friend which I found a bit odd. As he makes the friend very easily and it just seems to contradict everything they built up in the first part of the film. You are also given the impression that Zahn's character is maybe a bit slow or simple. But yet again, by the end of the film he is a fully functioning adult who doesn't seem to have these problems any more. And I understand that throughout the course of the film he develops and grows, but that much development was just a little over the top.
The whole butt touching thing really annoyed me. It was just too weird. And the last scene just made me want to scream. I won't go into it exactly but i doubt many people will feel differently about it. The whole thing just seemed unnecessary.
Woody Harrelson plays Aniston's ex and although I loved Zahn's performance, Harrelson was my favourite part of the film. He plays an ex punk, as we are continuously reminded and I just laughed every time he was on screen.
Overall I am pretty disappointed in this. I was led to believe it was a quirky, indie romance and although it started like this and looked promising for a long time, things just started to head south after about two thirds of the movie. In that sense it was a big disappointment but it had some good moments that are worth checking out.

Me and a friend went to see this at the cinema in 3D. As far as I can remember this is probably the first 3D film i've seen. I know that's pretty bad but the idea never really drew me in because i'd seen DVD's in 3D and they sucked because the screen was so small. This however was amazing. It wasn't just that the 3D itself was pretty ace, but that it made the film quality so much better. So for a start, I recommend this film in 3D if you get the chance.
As a film, it never really drew me in but there was nothing else showing at the time and my friend was pretty keen. I'm glad I did see it as it was exceptionally funny. Seth Rogan's character had to be the funniest. The lines his character got just had us in fits of laughter. And although it's pretty sad, we're still quoting the film at random points because they were so good and unforgettable.
The premise of the film was very simple and straight to the point, which I loved because it reminded me of the films I used to watch when i was a kid. Nothing fancy just plain funny.
Technically the film was very good as well. I think because they considered the 3D factor, the way it was shot was a whole lot more interesting as apposed to other animated films. Usually it's something I have to consciously look for in animated films but i felt myself noticing the angles etc, with ease.
As a family film I highly recommend it. Definatly one kids and adults will enjoy.

Not something I would usually be keen on seeing but I'm a huge fan of Andrew Lee Potts so i just had to see it.
The film actually really surprised me. It's low budget but they work well with what they have and everything turns out looking really good. It also reminded me why I kinda like cheap horror films.
The plot is really great and like a cross between I Know What You Did Last Summer and Flatliners, except creepier and better written.
All the actors do really great jobs. Usually you find the acting can be a bit horrible but I was really surprised.
Of course it was Potts that stole it for me, even if he did spend most of the film in a coma. He's a really terrific actor who is really underrated. It's good to see that he's breaking into cinema, even if it is just with small features like this.
The thing I love about horror films like this is, you always get really great scripts. They always do really well when it comes to plot and especially the ending. Probably because they don't have to make it too commercial. The ending was just perfect. I have to say I was expecting something a little less impressive, but it was really good.
Probably not for everyone, but if you like horror and you're looking for something that isn't that well known then I strongly suggest checking this one out.

I have a soft spot for Zac Efron. I couldn't stand the High School Musical films but when he gets out there on his own he's a very capable actor. I also can't say no to anything Matthew Perry.
I'm sure you can work out the plot from the title, but anyway. It's about a guy approaching middle age, who is currently going through a divorce and trying to stay close to his kids, both of which are unimpressed with him and really don't want to know. After being turned back into a 17 year old, he attempts to make the lives of children better and tries to get close to his wife.
This premise has been used soooo many times but for me, it never really seems to get old. This is a refreshing new take on it, that really doesn't bring anything new to the table. Although this is the case, it's still a charming and funny film. Efron and Perry do a good job of playing the same character, which in some cases can be way off when personality differs in each actor. But these two did it pretty well.
The comedy in the film is undeniable. It's very funny, especially when Efron is trying to fit in, in a new school, and try to not be too weird towards his children who think he is the son of their uncle.
It's a fun film that you shouldn't dismiss too quickly.

Typical romantic comedy that is far from original and could have been a lot better. However, you do get quite a few laughs out of it so I wouldn't dismiss it too quickly.
It's about a book editor and her assistant, who have to pretend to be engaged because she is about to be deported because she didn't fill in the paper work correctly. While trying to convince the government that their marriage isn't down to her circumstances, they also have to spend the weekend with his parents and grandmother and try to convince them as well. Over the weekend they learn things about each other that they didn't know before, even though they thought they had worked each other out a long time ago. I don't need to tell what happens in the end as a child with the mental capacity of a small rodent would be able to work it out.
The pairing of Sandra Bullock and Ryan Raynolds is just weird. Personally I don't think it works very well and chemistry is at an all time low, however as a comedy pairing, it isn't all that bad. In the beginning when they are trying desperately to pretend just to like each other, nevermind love each other, it is rather funny.
It's been a while since i've seen any Sandra Bullock films and she reminds me why I never bothered until now. She's a very average actress and in my opinion is yet to show if she's even capable of taking on a real role. So far it's just been mindless romantic comedies. If anyone is willing to challenge that view i'd quite happily retract my statement if you can give me another film where she didn't let herself down.
I believe Ryan Raynolds can do better than this. I've seen a few of his films and every so often you get this glimmer of talent but he's yet to prove whether or not it's more than just a glimmer.
Overall, it's not terrible. Of course many will hate this but if you're looking for a mindless chick flick then this is as good as any.

Exactly what you would expect from this type of movie. Only decided to watch it because I really like Anne Hathaway. But it really is this generic crap that she needs to get away from to move forward in her acting career. Anymore like this and she really isn't going to reach her full potential. She's a wonderful actress when she gets the chance to excel and this isn't the type of film that is going to let her do that.
Despite my problems with her underachieving, she does do a very good job with loads of comedy moments that will make you laugh.
Kate Hudson does a good job as well. Together, it could have been slightly better but I think they just about get away with it. A bit more chemistry between the two 'best friends' would have been nice.
Even though it's kind of irrelevant, I might as well mention that the two young girls that play them as children, actually look scarily like them.
The plot is good, with a predictable ending, with lots of hints dropped through out. As chick flicks go, it wasn't terrible. I always like best friend movies. I think they make you appreciate your best friend just by giving you a little reminder as to how much you love them. Not that I really need reminding. Kinda glad this type of thing won't happen with us because some of the things the two characters do to each other are pretty vicious.
Anyway, it's not bad. Obviously not for everyone, but if you fancy something easy you might wanna check it out.

Not a fan of Jennifer Garner and I pretty much can't stand Matthew McConaughey. I have no idea why I watched this film at all. I was destined to hate it.
It's about this arrogant arsehole, played by McConaughey, who I think fits the role quite well as he does come across as a bit of an arse anyway. All the way through his life he's jumped between women and disregarding them just as quickly, all because his dead playboy uncle gave him some terrible advice when he was a boy. Then when he, his brother and some old friends are reunited at his brother's wedding, characters from his past turn up to teach him a lesson. Okay, so my synopsis has just turned into some kind of warped horror movie. Although I think the whole movie would have been a lot better had a brainless bunch of blonde zombies turned up and just eaten McConaughey's head in the first act. Would have save everyone else a lot of pain.
The film is pretty much a variation of a Christmas Carol but with a lot more blonde supermodels.
The performances are stiff and unbelievable at times. Michael Douglas plays the dead uncle, so he pops up every now and again and that just makes me hate the film that little bit more as I can't really stand him either. Lacey Chabert plays his brothers fiancee and it was kinda nice to see her in it.
A mess of a film that everyone would do best to avoid.

I'm sorry Cal I know you said you loved it because it was so bad but I'm hating it because it's so bad.
It really is what you'd expect from a film with a title like that.
The performances from the actors are actually not too bad in places. Or at least they're not as terrible as you'd expect but when the more dramatic scenes arrive they suddenly lose their ability to be mediocre and deliver some of the worst lines in the worst possible way. They're unconvincing and just down right horrible.
The editing is some of the worst i've seen as well. There is just so much stock footage in this film as well which really doesn't do it any good as it's plainly obvious when this is the case. To show a ship or something under attack from the inside, the director seemed to instruct the actors to role around like loons and the camera to be shaken from side to side. I think this works on early cinema where they really didn't have any other option. And I have to say they did a better job of making it look slightly convincing.
I'll admit that some of the attack scenes are pretty inventive but i'm not giving the film any credit for that as it does reach a point where it's a little stupid. I mean what, planes fly at around 25,000 feet in the air as far as I can remember, but this shark manages to jump out the sea and grab it. I don't care how big the bloody thing is.
The ending was one giant cop out. I mean, is that really the best they could do.
I don't think I need to tell you to avoid this film. And thanks for the recommendation Cal, I suppose even the worst films have their fans. It just may be the case that your the only one for this film.