Movie Review: Terminator Salvation

It's noisy, dirty, sweaty, brings out the most basic instincts, and it's full of intense, screaming action.

Keep your pants up, I'm not talking about a porno.

I'm obviously talking about Terminator Salvation. It's been pretty much panned by critics, but it was such a high profile movie that there was no way I was getting put off.

Being a big fan of Christian Bale, I expected him to carry out his role as John Connor with the same gusto as Bruce Wayne and Batman. And I would certainly say I wasn't disappointed. He's the same in every movie, but I think it's a winning formula so a lack of variation doesn't trouble me. Something that did disappoint me however, was that I missed the first ten minutes of the movie due to spending too much time in the boozer drinking whisky.

So it took me a few minutes to get my bearings in the movie, since it was well underway when we arrived. It looked like it had been all-action, right from the beginning - and that would make sense because it was all-action right to the end. That would put some people off, since the action does come at the expense of the plot to quite an extent, but overall, Terminator is not a complicated story.

I had intended to watch the other Terminator movies before I went to see Salvation, but I didn't need to. It was nicely reintroduced, and it wasn't difficult to remember the key plot points from the older movies or to figure out who was who and what was happening.

It also didn't matter that I hadn't seen the other films again because I fully intend to watch them all, then see Salvation once more. It was terrific. I loved every single minute of it and left the cinema completely happy having spent a few quid on the ticket.

I have to admit that it would have been pretty weak if Bale hadn't been the star, but everything was built around him so it would have been a very different film. The cast is quite low-key in terms of previous fame, but they held their own for the most part. Anton Yelchin was crap, but maybe it was his character that was crap, and he was just good at playing a crap person? Not sure. Sam Worthington who played Marcus Wright, was (deliberately or not) portrayed in a similar way to Marcus Fenix from Gears of War - cold in a kind of intriguing way, but you that know he wouldn't hesitate to shoot you in the face if you stole his pint or killed his dog.

There was only one major fault in the movie, which I absolutely and completely hated. The appearance of Arnie as the T-800. The CGI was absolutely horrific, and his appearance was so short that it was as if the producers knew the CGI was crap, but knew that they had to show Arnie to please the fanboys. They clearly wanted to get him off the screen as quickly as possible, much to my relief.

Governor of California aside, I thoroughly enjoyed it but I wouldn't expect everyone to feel the same. It's a 'wash over you' kind of film, probably more suited to the boys.

I'm glad there are going to be another two in the series, and will certainly be going to see them.

Movie Review: Twilight

After having heard much hype about it, we decided to watch Twilight last night.

I'm completely unfamiliar with the book it's based on (it's designed for teenage girls!), so aside from reading a quick IMDB review I hadn't really developed any preconceived ideas of what it would be like. Apparently it has a huge cult following so I was expecting something which was interesting, if not necessarily incredible.

It's based on the story of a young girl called Bella (Kristen Stewart) from Arizona who moves to Forks, Washington to live with her Father. After the stereotypical 'new girl at school' sequence, she meets a bizarre 'boy' called Edward Cullen, and after the usual initial awkwardness, he becomes more friendly towards her and saves her from a car accident using his special vamPowers (I called them that). Eventually she figures out he's a vampire, yet decides she loves him anyway, and the story continues from there.

Basically Edward belongs to a family of 'vegetarian vampires' (even though they drink animal blood), but there are some bad vampires on the loose who are killing people. One gets a whiff of our girl Bella and decides he wants to bite her neck. So the rest of it is about the fight to defend her from the badVamp.

There are several things I really like about this movie:

- The soundtrack. It's really very good, and the the end sequence with 15 Step by Radiohead just makes it. I think it could've done with more tension and suspense, perhaps accompanied by a track from Godspeed or the Mars Volta.
- It's very laid back. Some would find it frustrating, but throughout the movie it's as if the director was constantly telling the cast to 'look pensive! Try to look like you've just smelt a freshly laid fart, look as if you're working out who did it' (Friends style). So there's a lot of angsty teenage moments. The actor who plays Edward (Robert Pattinson) is excellent at this.
- I like the setting of a slightly creepy town where it's always grey and it's always raining. The people there all seem slightly disturbed, and it all adds to the atmosphere.

Unfortunately, there are also several things I really don't like:

- Kristen Stewart is depressing. She takes the 'pensive, angsty' thing too far and she has a face like a broken leg. They could've cast someone better for the role.
- Some of the dialogue is far too cheesy.
- The special effects (particular the vampire movements) appear very contrived.
- The film feels like it's always building up to something, as if an epic scene is just about to burst onto the screen. It never happens, and you feel a bit unfulfilled by the time the movie finishes.

Apparently some people think that Twilight is so good that that they will watch it once, then immediately go back to the beginning and watch it again.

These people are easily amused. It's not a bad movie, but it's flawed. Having said that, I will watch the sequel which is currently in production.

Movie Review: Marley and Me

I used to have a dog. She was called Tess, and she was a cross between a labrador and a collie. A lollie, if you like. Or a cabrador.

Anyway, she was awesome. A totally loyal, totally loveable creature who inevitably became a fully fledged family member. She had big floppy ears and a very long suffering nature, which was perfect because she was constantly surrounded by children who pulled her tail, pushed her over and chased her around the place.

One day she was standing near the fire, and a yelp was heard. She'd been paying no attention and put her tail in the fire. She had a big burnt bit on the end of her tail until the day she died. She might've been a bit of a dumbass, but boy did I love that dog.

I went into Marley and Me thinking that the dog would be more of a side character, but he was the focus of the film from start to finish. He was used as a window onto the turbulent lives of his owners (played by Jennifer Aniston and Owen Wilson), and it wasn't until towards the end of the film that I found myself warming towards the dog's character.

You meet him as a tiny puppy, the 'runt' of the litter. And of course he's ridiculously cute. But as he grows up, Marley becomes wild and destroys everything he touches, and he's portrayed as exactly the kind of dog you wouldn't want to have. Although the film continues to centre around him, this disconnect from Marley as a character leads you to look to his human counterparts for some depth in the movie.

Depth that you don't really find, but it is quite enjoyable watching them make the big decisions in their lives, make big mistakes and mistakenly plop out more kids than they had planned to.

The movie really comes into its own towards the end, as you begin to see old age taking its toll on Marley. It's not that it's fun to watch an animal succumb to its weakened state (it's exactly the opposite in fact), but it brings out the other characters as they struggle to cope with watching him deteriorate.

I won't say anything else about the end of the film, but I was blubbering like a girl at points. It really brought home how strong the bond between animals and their owners can be, it reminded me strongly of how much I loved my dog and detested watching her grow old, and on the basis of that I would recommend it for others to see. It's a popcorn movie, nothing spectacular about it - it's just good fun to watch.

Movie Review: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Versatility is a quality which I think seperates great actors from good ones. Kevin Spacey, Edward Norton, Johnny Depp: all have demonstrated that they will forgo appearance and the 'cool factor' to make a movie with integrity. Another one I'd add to that list is Brad Pitt. Some may object, but look at some of his filmography:

Se7en

Fight Club

Snatch

Ocean's Eleven, Twelve and Thirteen

Burn After Reading

I doubt many could argue that his performance in Se7en turned the film into a classic. Fight Club, I think was simply the epitomy of cool. Both of these films are so good that no matter how many times you watch them, you will probably spot something you hadn't seen before. Of course, that can't be attributed solely to Brad Pitt: but it makes for a pattern of brilliant films that are so good they become timeless.

In each of those films, he tries to body swerve the 'dumbass pretty boy' image with intelligent dialogue, sophisticated plot and character developments, and by putting a distance between himself and the viewer in an attempt to come across as mysterious. I think it works.

And to prove that he isn't fussed about simply pleasing the hordes of women who scream at him everywhere he goes, he is happy to take the role of the gormless idiot (Burn After Reading) or the pathetic old (young) man. Take the example of his recently released film The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, directed by the same man as Se7en and Fight Club - David Fincher.

I saw this in the cinema recently, and went into it expecting something very different. That's probably because I hadn't even seen the trailer and had no idea what the film was about, but it was still different.

The film begins in 1918 with an unknown baby, born to a mother who dies in childbirth. At first he appears to be horrifically disfigured, but in actual fact he was born old. The film follows this character throughout his life right into the 21st century, as he grows younger with time, as the people around him grow older. It's a bizarre plot in a way, because no attempt was made to explain why Benjamin found himself in this situation, and nobody around him ever seemed to display much surprise or interest in his apparent age-reversal. But if they had tried to explain that, the film would have been far too long.

Cate Blanchett is brilliant in the film, providing a beautiful constant in a story with an ever changing series of characters, as the plot follows Benjamin through his varied life across the United States. Blanchett plays Rosie, the love of Benjamin's life whom he meets when they are both children (though Benjamin looks 90), and they oscillate round each other, finding themselves back together at various intervals throughout their lives.

It's an excellent story with a few really exciting moments (though there could have been more of those), which really envelopes you and you can't help buying into the plot - even though it's not without its holes.

Brad Pitt continues his long list of great performances in this movie. At no point throughout the story, as a nine year old who looks eighty, or an eighty year old who looks nine, did he ever compromise his character by showing 'too much of himself' - he was believable at all times while showing the occasional flash of brilliance.

Movie Review: Hancock

I think Will Smith is great.

He can be a gung-ho, hilarious, apparently low intelligence action hero in movies like Men in Black, Independence Day, and I, Robot then do a film with a little more substance like The Pursuit of Happyness and come across as an ordinary person with proper feelings and emotions.

So I like to watch his movies. And until I see Seven Pounds I thought I'd hire Hancock from BlockBuster.

Wasn't really expecting much to be honest, since the reviews were not good. But they've been regularly wrong in the past, and I'm probably a little more tolerant than most.

At first it was a breath of fresh air, and I was riveted to the screen for probably the first hour or so. I liked the fact that he was drunk all the time, couldn't fly without waving his arms and legs all over the place and was more concerned about getting his next bottle of booze than not destroying stuff. But unfortunately I had to agree that it lost it a little when they explained why he had super powers.

I could've accepted a Spider Man or Hulk-esque 'bit by a spider' or 'fell in radioactive stuff' explanation more easily than the reason offered. It felt like they had gotten to the bit where they had to explain his superpowers, ran out of ideas and went cross eyed.

I hate it when a film goes awry like that, especially when it had a huge budget and started so well. But even with its faults, I did enjoy Hancock and will definitely watch the sequel because apparently Will Smith hated the first film and will be much more involved with the next. And even though this film has its faults, it's one hundred times better than the drivel that is Superman Returns.

I'd recommend it for the kind of night where you just want to sit and watch an action film which just washes over you. Get a beer and ogle Charlize Theron.

Australia

The trailer for Australia made it look rubbish. So that, combined with the fact that it's had quite a few poor reviews (even the Australians thought it was mediocre), when I was told that we were planning to go and see it in the cinema, I was a little skeptical.

I shouldn't have been. It was superb.

Yes, it was long. Yes, it was a bit indulgent. But I thought it was interesting, it kept me interested throughout and with its beautiful cinematography and sound, it really does remind you of why the cinema will always be superior to sitting watching a movie at home. It also made me want to visit Australia... maybe that was one of the goals of the movie!

Baz Luhrmann's movies have struck a cord with me in the past, I loved Romeo and Juliet, I liked Moulin Rouge (HATED Sweaty Ballroom though). So I was expecting it to be hugely stylised to the same extent as his older movies, but I think he realised that it wouldn't have worked. So you can spot his watermarks on the film, but it's not too much.

A lot of people think that Australia could have been an hour shorter - but I disagree. I can't understand why people have such low tolerance for long movies. They whine when it's too short, they whine when it's too long. Crikey!

Hugh Jackman: Good, but a face like a bag of pig's arses. Nicole Kidman: Always the same. But it worked, and the little aboriginal kid was brilliant.

Needless to say, I disagree with the Canberra Times and it's a faux five to them for their review. It's a good movie, and I've already recommended Australia to my Mum.