The Thing (2011)

The Thing

Directed By: Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.
Written By: Eric Heisserer

Produced By: Marc Abraham, Eric Newman

Cast:Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Ulrich Thomsen, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Eric Christian Olsen

Plot: A mixed group of Norwegian and American scientists discover a massive Alien ship underneath the ice of the South-Pole. It's pilot isn't dead as first believed, and starts assimilating itself into the group, causing paranoia and suspicion.

I'm going to be completely honest. The film is essentially a remake of the John Carpenter, 1982 classic horror, but it's the prequel story of the Norwegian Scientists of the first film. But as a stand alone film, it is remarkable.The plot is fairly substantial, with minor character development, which in an ideal world, would be expanded on, but with the majority of the cast being Z-list foreign actors who are bound to be killed off anyway, we're not going to complain. 

The first 20 minutes of the film are a little bit slow, building up the tension of what the scientist's have found, and what they plan to do, but then after this, the situation unravels, and the trust between what appears to be a close knit group of colleagues, fades away, and all hell breaks loose. Visually, "The Thing" itself is quite impressive, with the high standards of CGI today, the creature is both terrifying and revolting to observe. There are several moments in the film, where I genuinely felt terrified, and even though we've been here before (If you've seen the original that is) It's quite refreshing to have an expansion on the cold, unsettling situation that the original created.

But, the film lacks originality in places. There are several attacks that are so similar to the original, they could've easily been part of a remake. Also, some of the solutions the team come up with for fighting The Thing are nearly a 21st Century copy of John Carpenter's masterpiece. The film also pays homage to another creature feature, Alien, with a face hugger copy-cat. (If you haven't seen Alien, watch it, and you'll immediately understand) Elizabeth-Mary-Winstead does come across as an Ellen Ripley style character (Female lead in Alien), she's quite sassy, but intelligent, there aren't many characters like that in movies lately, but something a little bit more different would've been appreciated.

The only other downfall to the film, is that if you've seen the original, you know how it all ends. This almost ruins it for the viewer, as an unpredictable ending is always better than one we already know before we've even watched it. But as i mentioned earlier, as a stand-alone film, it's brilliant. The killings also surprised me, for a 15-rated certificate, it was rather gory, more than expected. It's an interesting one, it's ruined if you've seen the original, but as a film by it's self it's quite intriguing.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Immortals

Immortals

Directed By: Tarsem Singh

Written By: Mark Canton, Ryan Kavanaugh, Gianni Nunnari

Produced By: Vlas Parlapanides, Charley Parlapanides

Cast: Henry Cavill, Freida Pinto, Luke Evans, Mickey Rourke, Isabel Lucas, Kellan Lutz

Plot: King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) declares war against the Greek Gods after his family dies from disease, and goes in search of the Epirus Bow, able to kill the Gods themselves. The Gods choose Theseus, as their defender against Hyperion and his gigantic force.

The film is visually outstanding, with vast CGI landscapes, and an army that is overwhelming just to look at, this is quite obviously from the creators of 300 (About 300 Spartans fighting a gargantuan army, familiar?) I spent half of the film in awe at the magnificent effects, and the stylisation of the piece. However, I wasn't missing out on a terrific storyline. There wasn't enough depth into any of the characters, and the motive for some of their actions aren't especially justified.

The only character I really connected with, was Luke Evans' portrayal of Zeus. His rage and compassion seemed to be the only real emotion throughout the film. The rest of the cast seemed to be slightly wooden, and out of place. I also feel that Hyperion is exaggerated slightly. He's excessively violent against people he doesn't need to be. Henry Cavill seems to be trying to fit into the rather large shoes of Gerard Butler from 300, the speech towards the end of the film is rather reminiscent of Butler's performance. This isn't necessarily a negative issue, but some originality would be better received.

But the film does have some positives, there are several points where the audience itself feel empowered by what is happening on screen, alas, these moments are few. The film is full of fight scenes and epic battles (even if half of it is CGI), some of which are extremely impressive. There are also a few scenes, one in particular, that are very unpleasant, and will make every man watching, cross their legs and squeal. Overall, Immortals is an over violent film, with impressive special effects, it isn't going to be a classic, but maybe remembered for the stylisation alongside 300.

Written By Eammon Jacobs.

The Rum Diary

The Rum Diary

Directed By: Bruce Robinson

Written By: Bruce Robinson (Based on the book of the same name by Hunter S. Thompson)

Produced By:Johnny Depp, Graham King, Christi Dembrowski, Anthony Rhulen, Robert Kravis

Cast: Johnny Depp, Aaron Eckhart, Amber Heard, Michael Rispoli, Richard Jenkins, Giovanni Ribisi

Plot: Paul Kemp is a journalist, with no real home, tired of America, he finds work at a failing newspaper in Puerto Rico. He becomes addicted to two things; Rum and a woman named Chenault.

The film is based upon Hunter S. Thompson's novel of the same name, and whilst it misses out some of the parts in the book, it easily maintains the unpredictability of Thompson's style of writing. Johnny Depp is quite convincing as the rum soaked journalist, but is slightly stale in places. For example, towards the end, Kemp becomes empowered to save the newspaper, and the way he describes his superiors as "Bastards", doesn't seem entirely fitting for the character. But Depp comes across as quite a complex character, so in that sense, he has truly portrayed Paul Kemp, in the style that Thompson would be proud of.

I was quite impressed with Aaron Eckhart's performance of Sanderson, the property developer who isn't all that he seems. The way he can flip between being a powerful, but helpful friend, and then the jealous raging schemer. There are a few moments that are strangely reminiscent to "Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas". A film that was originally a book also written by Hunter S. Thompson (Depp also starred) The film is quite odd in places, usually involving Giovanni Ribsi's character, Moburg. But Moburg is very amusing throughout the whole film, and lightens the mood in serious situations.

The film also depicts the end of the "American Dream", as we see the Americans living in Puerto Rico realise the dire state that the island had fallen into. Kemp experiences this first hand, and attempts to try change this. The film does drag on slightly, and would maybe better as an hour and a half feature rather than two hours, but it's not a major negative. The atmosphere of the location makes the audience feel out of place, going hand in hand with Depp's character's situation. The film is well crafted, intriguing and enjoyable.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

The Debt

The Debt



Directed By: John Madden

Written By: Matthew Vaughn, Jane Goldman, Peter Straughn

Produced By: Matthew Vaughn, Kris Thykier, Eduardo Rossoff

Cast: Sam Worthington, Helen Mirren, Jessica Chastain, Tom Wilkinson, Ciaran Hinds

Plot: Alternating between 1966, and 1997, the film follows three Mossad agents trying to kidnap a Nazi war criminal, and put him to trial.

The film is based on what might have happened if Mossad agents had looked for Joseph Mengele in the 1960's. The film is about getting justice for the millions of people who were put through hell, and the hatred that they felt for the men who committed these terrible acts of murder and torture. This hatred is clearly personified through Sam Worthington in what would be his most emotional performance to date. The way in which he acts towards "The Surgeon Of Birkenau", shows us the hatred, and animosity felt by the millions affected.


The main distraction throughout the whole film, is the differences between the two sets of actors in each time period. They simply do not correlate with each other. For example, Sma Worthington and Ciaran Hinds' character. Ciaran does not look like an older version of Worthington whatsoever. 
Even though this is a small aspect of the film to criticise, it is very distracting when we are
trying to remember that this is still the same character just alot older.


With the recent wave of retro spy features hitting the cinemas lately, i have to say that The Debt
would probably be one of my favourites. It's pacey and suspenseful, but has a lot of heart in it too.
I'm not really a fan of romantic sub-plots within films, but i rather liked the 'love triangle' between
the three agents. It was almost a breath of fresh air from all the hatred to "The Surgeon",
and even though it ended sadly, it would've been quite nice to see them all have their happy 
ending. 


I won't reveal the main ending, but i feel that it was rounded off in the correct way. I feel that Sam
Worthington's character's morals have been fulfilled at the ending, and we see who can, and can't
deal with this. If a little slow to start with, this is worth a watch.


Written By Eammon Jacobs

Alien

Alien

Directed By: Ridley Scott

Written By: Dan O'Bannon, Ronald Shussett

Produced By: Gordon Carroll, David Giler, Walter Hill

Cast: Sigourney Weaver, John Hurt, Henry Dean Stanton, Veronica Cartwright, Tom Skerritt, Ian Holm, Yaphet Koto

Plot: When a Deep Space mining ship receives a signal from an unknown planet, they are completely unaware of the danger they have let themselves in for.

Originally, Alien was poorly recieved by critics, and religous zealots viewed this piece of horrific art, as work of the Devil. It isn't too hard to understand the reasoning behind this, as the Alien (or Xenomorph) slaughters the crew in an all manner of nasty ways. But, Ridley Scott has used a brilliant technique of not actually showing us the brutal deaths, but leaves it to our imagination. This makes the whole experience ten times scarier, some have even called it the "proto-type" for the slasher film genre.

The film has become infamous because of it's "chest burster" scene, which is both shocking, and quite disturbing, and is one of the greatest deaths in Cinema. The film is almost revenge on the string of 1970's films which had female characters sexually exploited by male monsters. The face-huggers method of implanting the eggs have been compared to male rape, this time by a terrifying monster with an almost "phallus"-like head. 

The film is completely terrifying, and claustrophobic. The set is very dark and moody, with shadows covering everything, leaving many places for the horrifying monster to emerge. There are several moments throughout the feature where I truly felt terrified and almost helpless. In the 1970's, it was very rare to have a female antagonist (hero of the film) and Sigourney Weaver does a brilliant job of being the first female badass in film.

Eammon Jacobs

The Girl Who Played With Fire

The Girl Who Played With Fire

Directed By: Daniel Alfredson

Written By: Ulf Ryberg

Based Upon book of the same title by: Stieg Larsson

Produced By: Soren Staermose, Jon Mankell

Starring: Noomi Rapace, Michael Nyqvist

Plot: Lisbeth Salander returns to Sweden after a year abroad, only to be accused of three murders, and has to go on the run whilst Mikael Blomkvist tries to clear her name and uncovers some horrifying truths. 

Stieg Larsson's Millenium trilogy have become world famous, making millions worldwide, and it seemed only fitting that they should be brought to the big screen. The original Swedish films have stayed true to the books, and have also been very successful. The first film was extremely dark, and the second installment carries on that theme, I noticed that there were no jokes, or humorous comments made throughout, and it's very clear that this is a very serious feature.

I do think that the film is rather inaccessible to anyone who has not read the books, as there are very complex plot-lines, with various characters weaving in and out of the story. Noomi Rapace is an actress completely unheard of before being cast as Lisbeth Salander, a role in which she plays a troubled, and frequently violent young woman beautifully. She makes this film into something else, something more interesting and rather brilliant. The chemistry between herself and Nyqvist's sinccere portrayal of Mikael Blomkvist is spiky yet fantastic. 

The film is not easy watching, and is definitely not something you can dip in and out of, you need to concentrate for the full two hours, otherwise you will lose out on vital information. The main point that brings this film down, and I cannot stress this enough, is how inaccessible this film is if you have not read the books. Even if you are familiar with them, this still takes alot of concentration, but it's most definitely worth it.

By Eammon Jacobs

Super 8

Super 8

Directed By: J.J. Abrams

Written By: J.J. Abrams

Produced by: Steven Spielberg

Cast: Elle Fanning, Joel Courtney, Kyle Chandler

Plot: In 1970's Ohio, a group of kids are filming their low budget Zombie flick in a small town. They witness a train derailment, and watch as mysterious events unfold throughout their town.

When news first surfaced that J.J. Abrams (Lost, Fringe, Cloverfield, Star Trek) had another project planned, and it was to be a monster movie, rumours flew around that it was to be a sequel/prequel to his previous monster film Cloverfield. He soon shot down those rumours claiming that this film was something else entirely. Not that I doubted J.J. for one second, but having watched the film, he was completely right.
Whilst there is a monster involved, and it does look like the creature in Cloverfield, we can tell straight away that this film has alot of heart, and alot of potential, completely different from J.J’s last monster outing. There is a substantial amount of character development, specifically focused on Joel Courtney and Elle Fanning’s characters. We see how, and why Courtney’s character is so tortured, and how he learns to overcome this obstacle. In several scenes it is quite obvious that Stephen Spielberg has had his input in the script and prodcution, with one scene in particular being similar to Close Encounters Of The Third Kind. This isn’t necessarily a bad move, if slightly unoriginal.
There were a few elements of horror thrown into the mix, which I thought was a terrific technique, and there are several scenes which wouldn’t have been out of place in a Wes Craven film. There is quite alot of comedy between the group of kids, which keeps the film fresh, but without losing it’s pace at the same time. Its alot different from most monster/horror/thriller films that involve sour-faced adults and soldiers (although there are plenty of those)

J.J. Abrams has clearly learned a thing or two about suspense from his time on Lost. We do not see the monster fully until the second half of the film, a technique also used in Cloverfield. It’s really effective, and you are constantly trying to visualise in your mind what the creature looks like. The ending is slightly cliche’d but won’t disappoint. The film is brilliant, funny, tense and completely captivating.
Another great feature from J.J. Abrams, and slightly more family appropriate this time around.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Captain America: The First Avenger

Captain America: The First Avenger

Directed By: Joe Johnstone

Produced By: Kevin Feige

Written By: Christopher Markus, Stephen McFreely

Cast: Chris Evans, Hugo Weaving, Hayley Atwell, Tommy Lee Jones, Sebastian Stan

Plot: When Steve Rodgers is rejected from the U.S Army on medical grounds, he is recruited to test a super-soldier serum, turning him into Captain America, and giving him the abilities to fight the Nazis.

Captain America originated from the minds of two of Marvel Comics writers. He was used as propaganda in World War II, and was first depicted punching Hitler in the face. Since then, Marvel Comics has sold millions of copies of his adventures, and now it is only fitting for him to reach the Big Screen. The film is your average action blockbuster, but with a little more heart.

Chris Evans plays the role of Steve Rodgers/Captain America superbly, and has the delightful ability to show the audience that he not only has the brains and the brawn, but has a heart too. The chemistry made between himself and Hayley Atwell’s character; Peggy Carter, is almost enchanting. I loved Hugo Weaving’s character Johann Shcmidt, as this isn’t Weaving’s first attempt at playing a psyhcopath (The Matrix) he has clearly perfected his method’s, but without playing the same character twice. There is a very sinister atmosphere to the film whenever he is present on screen, both when is normal (as normal as any psychopathic Nazi can be) and when he becomes The Red Skull.

However, there is a large element of the film that is too unbelievable. When Johann/The Red Skull finds the “magical” object, he creates many weapons. Weapons, that wouldn’t look out of place in Star Wars. The scenery also changes, and everything becomes slightly space-age. It seems highly unrealistic that in 1942, these things would be present. But nonetheless, the film is highly enjoyable, and is easily accessible to anyone who isn’t familiar with the character’s comic history.

Pulp Fiction

Pulp Fiction

Directed By: Quentin Tarantino

Written By: Quentin Tarantino, Roger Avery

Produced By: Lawrence Bender

Cast: John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth, Amanda Plummer, Maria de Medeiros, Ving Rhames, Eric Stoltz, Rosanna Arquette, Christopher Walken, Bruce Willis

Plot: There are three separate storylines featured within the film, but are told in a non-linear sequence, told out of sequence. They focus on hitmen Vincent Vega (Travolta) and Jules Winnfield (Jackson) and prize fighter, Butch Coolidge (Willis) All three stories intertwine and connect with each other in certain points.

The film is automatically a modern classic, but is also a timeless piece of art. Tarantino has been inspired by several 70's gangster features. However, he was able to create something entirely different and changed the crime genre completely. Each character has two sides to them. One side being completely calm and sociable, and the other being defensive and violent, but without being completely mindless. There is a substantial amount of character development and we get to see all aspects of their personalities without deviating away from the plot.

The cast is absolutely superb, with fantastic performances all round. I was particularly impressed with Bruce Willis character, Butch Coolidge. Willis usually plays the typical action hero in most of his films, and there is certainly action involved for his character, but he gets to branch out and show his emotion towards Madeiros' character, Fabienne. This breaks away from the majority of Willis' films, and I was impressed because I didn't think that he had the ability to show that side of a characters personality.

Much like Tarantino's other films, the feature is shot in an innovative style, with a mix of violence and humour thrown together, this could potentially be homage to Stanley Kubricks 'A Clockwork Orange', as that film also mixes violence and humour. Pulp Fiction was like the Star Wars of its generation.  Because it was seen as more of an Indie film rather than a blockbuster, It inspired many unknown directors to try to do as Tarantino did.

The film is fantastic, and a timeless piece of art.

By Eammon Jacobs

Upcoming films

 Up coming Films

Within the next few years, there are going to be some monumental films entering our cinemas, The Avengers (Marvel Comic's Superhero team up) Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy- Based on the book of the same name, and Rise of the Planet Of The Apes, and Paranormal Activity 3 just to name a few.

First off, thundering into cinemas within the next week is Joe Johnstone's take on Captain America: The First Avenger. This film is kicking off The Avengers series that Marvel Comics Studios has comissioned. It sees a scrawny, Americanarmy reject become a super soldier to take on the Nazis. Chris Evans (The Losers, Fantastic Four) is taking on the lead role and the rumour is that he has signed on for three more pictures. I have a high expectation of this film, particularly because it is a great story, alongside a great cast (Hugo Weaving, Tommy Lee Jones, Stanley Tucci, Dominic Cooper). Marvel Comics Studios have already given the green light for the sequel, this shows that the film has alot of potential, but also room for some (aggressive?) expansion. It will be released on July 22nd, 2011.

Conan The Barbarian is the remake of the 1982 film starring Arnold Schwarzenneger, this time however, the gargantuan fighter is played by a reasonably unknown actor, Jason Momoa. The film was originally going to start production in 2003 and would've featured Shwarzenneger as an older version of Conan, therefore creating a trilogy of the Conan films. But due to his election as governor of California this was deemed impossible. Whether or not the film will be successful lies upon if it has a substantial plot, or just a mindless bloodbath. At this stage, it looks as though it is in between. It will be released August 26th, 2011.



Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows is the sequel to Guy Ritchies 2009 hit, Sherlock Holmes in which he is also directing. Robert Downey Jr.(Iron Man, Iron Man 2) reprises his role as the title character. Also returning is Jude Law as his partner, Dr Watson. The apparant new comers are, Noomi Rapace (The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) as the mysterious Gypsy named Sim, and Jared Harris (Fringe) as Professor Moriarty. Also making an appearance is Stephen Fry, playing Sherlock's brother, Mycroft Holmes. It is unclear as to what the plot is yet, but from watching the trailer it is clear that mayhem is most definitely going to be caused. Hopefully, the second film shall live up to the fantastic plot of the first film, and it looks as though it is certainly going to be another achievement for Guy Ritchie. It will be released on December 16th, 2011.

The Amazing Spider-Man is the reboot of Sam Rami's 2002 film starring Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. This time around, Andrew Garfield, the co-star of The Social Network and has one of the leads in Never Let me Go, is playing the hapless student turned superhero. Although no promotional poster has been released to the media yet, there have been several pictures of Andrew Garfield in this new version of the suit. However,I cannot help but wonder if it is too soon for a reboot of the franchise, since Spider-Man 3 was released in 2007. However, this is not a remake of the first film, this time, there is a different plot entirely. The villain that he is being pitted against this time, is The Lizard, played by Rhys Ifans. Peter's love interest from the majority of the comics, and all three films, Mary-Jane Watson, will not be featured. However, the character Gwen Stacy from the early comics is going to feature as Peter's love interest and will be played by Zombieland star, Emma Stone. The film is going to be released in both 3D and 2D on July 13th 2012.

The Dark Knight Rises  is the round up to Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy, a reboot of the 1980's films. Christian Bale is once again suiting up as Gotham City's Dark Knight. Christopher Nolan has set the bar for Superhero films with the first two of his dark and gritty installments. Superhero's can no longer be equipped with latex suits and cheesy one-liners, they must now be something more. Nolan and his brother Jonathan (both have written the screenplay) have both confirmed that the villain will not be Mr Freeze or The Riddler. In the last month however, pictures have surfaced of Inception star, Tom Hardy, as Bane, the villain who becomes incredibly muscley after pumping himself full of a dangerous toxin. Anne Hathaway has been confirmed as Catwoman, Joseph-Gordon Levitt and Marion Cotillard have both stated their involvement with the film. Nolan has confirmed that Batman's sidekick, Robin, will not be appearing in this film, as Batman is still too young, however there have been rumours that he will carry on the franchise, so Batman and Robin could be his next feature. A U.K release date has not been set as of yet, but the U.S release date is July 20th , 2012.

Rubber

Rubber

Directed By: Quentin Dupieux

Written By: Quentin Dupiex

Produced By: Julian Berlan, Gregory Bernard

Cast: Stephen Spinella, Roxanne, Mesquida, Jack Plotnick

Plot: In an American desert, an abandoned tire comes to life, and embarks on a killing spree using psychic powers.

I once believed that Richard Kelly's 'Donnie Darko' was the strangest film I had ever watched, as of now, I have proved myself wrong. This is French director/musician, Quentin Depieux's second film, he has both written and directed this absurdly stylish feature. The idea is completely surreal, "an inanimate object comes to life and kills people". Its logic is questionable, how does this tire see? How does it hear? Does it have a brain? Where do these "powers" come from? The list could go on.

The film starts off with a small town sheriff speaking as if he is breaking the fourth wall, communicating with the audience, telling us about how most films have "no reason". He finishes his speech by announcing that this film too, has no reason. As he drives away, we see that he was actually talking to a group of people, who are given binoculars, and watch the events unfold. This could be some kind of subliminal metaphor about the worlds leaders and governments watching us at all times via CCTV and telephone hacking. That they are aware of everything we do or say.

There is no real logic behind the tire's lethal rampage, killing without mercy. The tire becomes a movie villain in its own right. The film has a certain, arthouse film feel to it, with relatively unknown actors and actresses,and a bizarre scenario. I do think that 82 minutes is a little too eager, and you may find that after an hour, things start to drag slightly. The films ending makes us believe that it is destined for a sequel, and I dare Dupieux to make an attempt at an even more bizarrely entertaining arthouse style film.

Eammon Jacobs

(500) Days Of Summer



(500) Days Of Summer

Directed By: Marc Webb
Written By: Mason Novick, Jessica Tuchinski, Mark Waters, Steven J. Wolf
Produced By: Scott Neustadter, Michael H. Weber

Cast: Joseph Gordon-Levitt(Inception), Zooey Deschanel (Elf+Yes Man)

Plot: When Tom Hansen meets Summer Finn, he believes that she is the one he is searching for. After a karaoke night at the local bar, Tom realises he is very attracted to Summer, and over the next few months, he realises he's in love with her. The isn't a love story, it's a story about love.

This film surprised me, i had a pre-concieved vision that it was going to be just another chick flick. It isn't. It is a well presented view into the world of the dumpee. It is told in a non-linear narrative, meaning that it jumps to different days within the 500 days of their relationship. This is an interesting, innovative retelling of the typical "Rom-Com". ItThe film is clever because typically, it is usually the male lead who is commitment shy. However, in (500) it is Summer Finn who is commitment shy. This clever twist provides a fresh perspective on the "Rom-Com" genre. The film doesn't sugar-coat a break up, it shows how raw people can be afterwards.

Gordon-Levitt and Deschanel have such chemistry together, they are delightful and heartbreaking at the same time.  They have the ability to bring something new to the worlds oldest clichéd genre, which is something that won't happen very often within a film and is astounding. They also master the art of story telling by noting the rise and fall of a great relationship.

It is sweet, very sweet in fact, but it does lack something, a proper ending. (Apologies for the spoiler) The film ends on a romantic cliff hanger, will he, won't he? If we could see past this drop, then I feel that the film would have rounded off nicely.
But it is one of the most honest, heartbreaking films I have ever seen.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Taken

Taken

Directed By: Pierre Morel

Written By: Luc Besson, Robert mark Kamen

Produced By: Luc Besson

Cast: Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace, Famke Janssen

Plot: A retired CIA operative (Neeson) is trying to repair his broken relationship with his daughter (Grace). When he allows her to go travelling in France with a friend, they are both kidnapped by Albanian Sex Traffickers. He sets out to find them, and kill them.

Liam Neeson is simply astounding in this role which sees him essentially, as an over protective father. He shoots first and asks questions later. Which shows the true desperation that this man has to retrieve his daughter. He puts himself through so much, and sacrifices his health, and almost his life, even though this looks like a gritty action flick, this is something so much more. If we break the whole film down, basically, this man is trying to repair a very fragile relationship. He is attempting the unthinkable to become a father again, he is fighting to be the parent he should've been and is therefore making up for lost time.

The audience is thrust into the action, and goes along with Neeson as he leaps without looking, regardless of the consequences, and what happens is, we watch him deal with those consequences, dealing with them with lethal force and heroic actions. Most action flicks are mindless, with no control over all the madness and with no character development whatsoever. But in the first thirty minutes or so, we see Neeson's character attempting to become the father he should've been, which shows how emotional the film really is, but honestly, this is a revenge picture.

Maggie Grace's limited screen time was slightly disappointing, she spends what little time she has on screen crying and screaming, which is an anti-cliax from an actress with such great potential. There have been rumours for a sequel entitled "Taken II", I strongly feel, that this a bad move on the production team's part, the first film is brilliant, with a fantastic atmosphere and emotion, I feel that a sequel would ruin that.

Eammon Jacobs

Never Let Me Go

Never Let Me Go

Directed By: Mark Romanek

Written By: Alex Garland (Orginal book by Kazuo Ishiguro)

Produced By: Mark Romanek, Alex Garland, Andrew Macdonald, Allon Reich

Cast: Andrew Garfield, Casey Mulligan, Kiera Knightley

Plot: The film is set in an alternative history, where people are grown as scientific experiments to provide organs, limbs, blood for their 'Originals'. The story focuses on three characters, caught in a love triangle.

At first, the film is somewhat confusing. It starts off in a school full of children and they are all frightened of going outside of the boundaries. I can understand how the producers wanted to keep this as a method of suspense, but I feel that when we find out why they are frightened to go beyond the boundaries (a lie told by their teachers) it is rather disappointing. However, this is probably one of the only negative points in the film. Throughout the entire duration, there is a strange atmosphere, as if the entire cast are waiting for something to happen.

The connection between Andrew Garfield and Casey Mulligan's characters throughout the film is magnificent, all the way through, we know that they are perfect for each other and that they belong together. Having read the original book myself, I feel that the film encaptures every single aspect of the authors unpredictability and sombre tone. This isn't an edge of your seat piece, this is a laid back, easy to watch piece of art. We also experience how horrifying human beings can be, forcing these people into existence, just for them to be harvested for other peoples personal gain. It is almost a metaphor for some of the horrific things that carry on aroundd the world today, for example, dictators killing mercilessly purely for land.

But, I do feel that the script was compacted in places, they should've made certain parts elongated, so that the audience could get a better feel for the emotions that really run raw in the finale of the film. For example, the heartbreak of both Garfield and Mulligan's characters, i think the feature would have benefited greatly if the audience was granted a better insight.

The film is most certainly an odd one, and is not something you would expect, but is also definately the kind of thing from one of the producers of The Beach and 28 days later, even though all three films are completely different. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie simply because of it's emotion and humanity.

Eammon Jacobs

Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part II

Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part II

Directed By: David Yates

Written By:

Produced By:

Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Ralph Fiennes, Tom Felton, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman

Plot: In the final installment of the Harry Potter series, Harry must destroy the remaining horcruxes to defeat Voldemort and save his fellow wizards in an epic battle.

If this is viewed as a stand alone film, the plot, the context and the characters would be confusing, out of place and without meaning. However, as the final chapter in the adaptations of J.K Rowling's series, the film is terrific. If a little slow to pick up from where Part 1 ends, the film gradually builds up the pace until we are thrown into the midst of a rather emotional battle. The majority of audiences over the past ten years have grown up with the characters, and to see them fighting for their lives leaves the viewers desperate for them to survive. The first and last film are polar opposites of each other. The first (Philosphers Stone) is a light hearted adventure, the last, is a much darker tale.

Whilst watching, i was extremely surprised at the amount of blood, and effects used on the characters and scenery, as this is essentially a childrens movie, I didn't expect this. This doesn't distract us from the story however, it makes us more aware, that our characters have grown up and are practically adults, and that the danger for them is real. 
The finale of the film is completely gripping, as the stakes rise, and the body count of both heroes and villains become higher. It does not seem possible for there to be a happy ending, but I assure you, the ending is most certainly a happy one.

And so, we wave goodbye to the films that have lasted ten years, that we have grown up with. We have watched the characters themselves turn from innocent children, to young adults, as the majority of audiences, have done so themselves.

Eammon Jacobs

Shutter Island

Shutter Island

Directed By: Martin Scorsese

Written By: Laeta Kalogridis, Steven Knight (Based on the book by Dennis Lehane)

Produced By: Martin Scorsese, Bradley J. Fisher, Mike Medavoy, Arnold W. Messer

Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Ben Kingsley, Mark Ruffalo, Michelle Williams

Plot: U.S Marshall Edward "Teddy" Daniels (DiCaprio) and his partner, Chuck Aule (Ruffalo) are sent to a psychiatric facility on "Shutter Island" to investigate the mysterious disappearance of one of their patients.

Martin Scorsese is reknowned for his complex and dark films, for example, Taxi Driver and The Departed. Shutter Island follows this pattern. But Scorses is clever in the way that he has crafted this film. He tries to convince us that this is a fairly simple thriller, when in reality it is a smart picture, and extremely complex. However this could also be a negative, simply because some people do not want to have to think, and try to work out the ending, the just want to enjoy the cinematic experience. But the end result, is mind blowing, fantastic and leaves us mulling the plot over in our minds numerous film times to grasp the concept of the finale.

The musical score that accompanies Scorses artful piece, is wonderous to listen to, and is a superb companion to the film. In certain scenes, the score is what makes this film so emotional and raw. Once we get deeper and deeper into the storyline, the picture starts to become slightly clearer, and we see that what seems like a sup-plot, is the main plot. Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Ruffalo and Ben Kingsley give absolutely superb performances right through out the film. Definately a must see.

Eammon Jacobs

Devil

Devil

Directed By: John Erick Dowdle

Written By: Brian Nelson, M. Night Shyamalan

Produced By: John Erick Dowdle, Drew Dowlde, M. Night Shyamalan, Sam Mercer

Cast: Chris Messina, Bojana Novakovic, Bokeem Woodbine, Logan Marshall-Green, Jenny O'Hara, Geoffrey Arend

Plot: 5 people get into an elevator, when one of them dies, tensions risee, until it is crystal clear, that one of them is not who they say they are.

M. Night Shyamalan attempts to be the modern day Alfred Hitchcock, by creating this claustrophobic thriller/slasher flick. He certainly suceeds by keeping the 5 unsuspecting victims in the lift for the majority of the film, he  manages to kill them off quite effectively. He also keeps us on the edge of our seats by keeping us guessing all the way through who the killer is, the end result? Almost comical, which to be honest, ruins the film. In the final scene, I cannot take the killer seriously simply because it seems ridiculous and slightly cliche'd.

However, I do find the narration from the Spanish security guard at the start and end of the film very effective. It gives the film an eerie atmosphere before it has even begun, add to that the heavy piano sounds mixed into some of the scenes, and the scary atmosphere is complete. The actors in the film are relatively unheard of, which is good to have some fresh talent introduced. I was a little nervous each time the lights went off, because it is not obvious how these people are going to die, so I was slightly anxious to see how M. Night Shyamalan would work this into the film.

Devil isn't a work of  art, but it is entertaining enough, and doesn't have you groaning at each twist, it also doesn't have an extremely complicated story, it is a simple idea, developed into an Agatha Christie style thriller.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Inception

Inception

Directed By: Christopher Nolan

Written By: Christopher Nolan

Produced By:Christopher Nolan, Emma Thomas

Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Marion Cottilard, Tom Hardy, Ellen Page, Cillian Murphy, Ken Watanabe, Tom Berenger,

Plot: Dom Cobb is a theif of the mind. He goes into people's subconcsious and extracts information required by whoever employs him. When he is offered the chance to return home after being pursued my numerous agencies, he jumps at the chance, only to find that he must not steal information, instead to plant an idea in a man's mind.

Inception has many levels of complication throughout the story, but has tongue in cheek moments throughout most of the film, whilst still maintaining a very serious atmosphere. Because the majority of the film is set within the mind, it could have easily been ruined by adding ridiculous themes and events into the storyline, because most normal dreams don't make any sense, so Christopher Nolan has been smart enough to keep the dreams themselves very sharp and realistic to save the film from becoming a farce.

However, I do feel that whilst Nolan has written a superb script, equipped with spectacular special effects and a terrific cast, the film lacks raw emotion, we do not get to see how any of the other characters feel about the events that are unfolding around them because the film is centred around Cobb.

This is not a film you can simply watch from any point, you have to watch it entirely to the credits, otherwise the experience and the effect that the story has on you is completely lost. Most of the things included in the film as brilliant and spectacular (Joseph Gordon-Levitts rotating corridor fight) whilst others are amusing, but simply pointless (Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Ellen Page's quick kiss) thus having no real reason for its input in the film. If the characters had more depth and had a little more focus on them then the film would have been benefited greatly.

But the concept of Inception, is completely mindblowing. A dream, within a dream, within a dream. This idea is fantastic and comes across plausible in the film without seeming ridiculous. The story is rather honest, and the last hour is spent wondering, how are they going to pull it off? The way in which Christopher Nolan rounds up his film is brilliant. And the last scene is completely up for debate, not having any real answers revealed, it is left up to us what has actually happened. Some people prefer the idea of a happy ending, but some people prefer the serious ending, but I won't give anything away.

Inception is a spectacle to be marveled at, and is one of the best films to have been released in the lastten years.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

The Hangover Part II

The Hangover Part II
Directed By: Todd Phillips
Written By: Todd Phillips, Craig Mazin, Scott Armstrong
Produced By: Todd Phillips, Daniel Goldberg

Cast: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, Ken Jeong

Plot: The Wolf Pack are back, but this time, it's Stu's bachelor party, in Bangkok.

The first film was an instant hit with audiences of all ages. There was a spark that everyone clicked with almost straight away. Part II, maintains the comedy, with hilarious moments almost every second. But, it hasn't got the same flare as the first one, this concept has already been done. We know how this is going to play out, its the good old "Where-the-hell-are-we-what-did-we-do-and-how-did-we-do-it" routine. What the film really needs is more originality, it needs more events/people/hotels that will make people remember the film for those iconic laughs.

 There are various parts of the storyline that also mirror the first film, stolen Tiger=stolen drug monkey, missing tooth=missing finger. It is almost a copy. Also, some of the laughs are out of shock, rather than comedic value. However, the film is rather funny, and is easily accessible to anyone, there are no complicated plotlines, just simple, but effective, comedy. But be warned, this is not a film you should watch with older relatives. There are numerous sex gags, nudity and swearing. This does lower the tone of the film, because it seems like the script writers have had to fall upon bad language to get the lines in, which isn't particularly a good thing.
But, why change something that works so well, and brought in plenty of money? It definately works, and is terribly funny. If they turn this into a franchise however, the magic will be ruined.


Written By Eammon Jacobs

X-Men: First Class

X-Men: First Class

Directed By: Matthew Vaugn

Written By: Matthew Vaugn, Jane Gouldman, Zack Stentz, Ashley Edward Miller

Produced By: Gregory Goodman, Simon Kinberg, Lauren Shuler Donner, Bryan Singer

Cast: James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Rose Byrne, January Jones, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, Oliver Platt, Kevin Bacon

Plot: In 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the film focuses on the relationship between Professor X and Magneto and the origin of their groups, the X-Men and the Brotherhood of Mutants.

The film is fast, very fast. Numerous things happen at the same time, and usually in a film, this doesn't work whatsoever. But, Matthew Vaughn (Director) manages to keep everything in place and isn''t confusing. It has some very clear moments, which gives the film something to say about itsself. In fact, the whole film could be a metaphor against segregation and racism. The mutants feel segregated and cut off from the rest of society, showing us how they feel about not being accepted into the normal world is an eye-opener into the hearts of many people affected by this kind of problem.

This film completely overshadows the original X-Men series, which was recieved poorly by critics and the public. First Class has layers of depth and a considerable amount of emotion in each of the characters. For example, we see how deep Magneto/Erik Leshnerr's psycological scars are from his horrific experiences in the Nazi concentration camps. However, the writers of the screenplay have been clever enough and wise enough not to turn the film into a mindless revenge flick.

It's clever, pacy and entertaining. Obviously, there were no mutants involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis, but whilst watching the film, you wish that is how nuclear war was averted, and is almost believeable.

The film's only cameo is rather amusing for anyone who is familiar with the X-Men series. There are more of the Origins films planned, and if they are written, and filmed as well as First Class, then they too should be a success.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Hanna

Hanna

Directed By: Joe Wright

Written By: Seth Lochhead

Produced By: Leslie Holleran, Marty Adelstein, Scott Nemes

Cast: Soairse Ronan, Cate Blanchett, Eric Bana

Plot: Hanna (Ronan) is a 16 year old girl who has lived in the wilderness with her father Erik (Bana) all of her life. Erik has trained her as an assassin, her target, is the woman who killed her mother, a corrupt CIA agent (Blanchett)

Hanna is like a teenage version of The Bourne Series. But it isn't a translation of the successful Bourne Series for teenagers, it is something new. Its gritty, edgy with twists and turns, and has enough action to make Bruce Willis jealous. Joe Wright succeds in weaving elements of fairy tales into the story, creating a rather eerie atmosphere throughout the film, which is extremely difficult in an action movie, but it works tremendously.

Soairse Ronan is completely mesmerizing and easily outshines the rest of the cast in emotion, ability and sharpness.

The idea for the film is rather outlandish and slightly surreal, but Joe Wright makes the film seem completely real in terms of the story, the locations and even the camera angles. Because we experience the film through the eyes of Hanna, we see our world from the perspective of someone who has never left a forest. It is quite an edgy experience. Hanna is musically accompanied by The Chemical Brothers, who deliver fast, pulsating tracks along with creepy, almost pretty tunes. Their music rounds of the film quite nicely.

The film is a mix of arthouse cinema, and a mainstream action film. Which surprisingly, is a perfect combination. It is a very slick spy/coming of age film, which is very unusual but works superbly.

However, there should've been a little more depth into the characters back story. (Who is Marissa? where did she come from? why is she this cold?) The film does hint for a sequel, so who knows, maybe all will be explained.

The film is thoroughly enjoyable, and is a fast paced, edge of your seat, stylish thriller.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Youth In Revolt

Youth In Revolt

Directed By: Miguel Arteta

Written By: Gustin Nash (Based on the book by C.D Payne)

Produced By: David Permut, Harvey Weinstein, Bob Weinstein

Cast: Michael Cera, Portia Doubleday, Justin Long, Zach Galifanakis, Steve Buscemi, Erik Knudsen

Plot: Nick Twisp (Cera) leads a very boring life, that is, until he meets Sheeni Saunders. He finds out how far he must go to get the woman who is perfect for him. What he doesn't expect is that to help him do this, he needs an alter ego....

The film has been hailed as Fight Club meets Superbad. Which is most certainly correct. Once again, Michael Cera is in that geeky teenager role that he plays so well. But he also took up the challenge of playing his own alter-ego too. His alter-ego being the super slick, versatile, hilarious character of Francois Dillinger. When he is playing Francois, the film suddenly becomes alot more exciting. The contrast between Nick and his delinquent alter-ego is refreshing is both pleasing and humorous. Because we are unsure of this character we don't know what he is going to do, as he is very impulsive (There are several examples of this in the film)

The film puts itself outside of the usual teen comedy, its edgier, darker, and hilarious. It does take a little while to get going, but once its going it is funny, fast paced and easy to watch. The rest of the cast give superb performances. Steve Buscemi had more of a cameo appearance, which was disappointing, but he played his part terrifically. On the whole, Youth In Revolt is an overwhelming success.

However, Michael Cera needs to expand his repertoire, because his films are starting to become the same story over and over again. He needs to find something that is going to rejuvenate his career.

The film has imagination, its charming, slightly pretentious but its enjoyable fun.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Thor

Thor

Directed By: Kenneth Brannagh

Written By: Ashley Edward Miller, Zack Stentz, Don Payne

Produced By: Kevin Feige

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Tom Hiddleston, Stellan Skarsgard, Idris Elba, Clark Gregg

Plot: The King of Asgard, Odin (Hopkins), banishes Thor (Hemsworth) to Earth after he ignites a war with an old enemy. Thor finds that his hero-like powers can make him a legend.

You would think that a film about Gods, old legends and mystical powers would be bad, terribly cheesy, and not worth watching. If you think that, then you are wrong. Thor is one of many films that Marvel Studios has planned for their big superhero team up, The Avengers (2012) The film has a light hearted feel when he is banished to Earth, however the fish out of water idea is getting a little old.  The scenes set on Earth, apart from the start of the third act, seem to be just to fill in the gaps between the epic battle scenes in Asgard and finding Thor's hammer, which was a bit disappointing.

The film does seem to try and big its self up with its impressive special effects, instead of focusing on the situation at hand. But never the less, the film's plot is quite good, with several twists that you will not see coming. When Chris Hemsworth is on-screen, he is charismatic, has great comic timing, and combining both his and Natalie Portman's performances, is beautiful. Tom Hiddleston's character, Loki, is devious, mischievous and cunning. He portrays this wonderfully, because his performance could've potentially broke this movie if it wasn't serious enough.

But, the film does feel like it is building up all the way through for an epic fight scene, spanning dimensions with bare knuckle brutality. The actual final fight is a little disappointing. But it is still entertaining. The ending to the film also, screams SEQUEL. That is if you watched through to the post-credits scene.

(Tip, with any marvel film, always watch it right through to the very end, they always add a clip for an up-coming project)

Finally, the film is very well directed by Kenneth Brannagh, and many of the cast have said that they wouldn't have taken the role on if it wasn't for Brannagh. I feel that Marvel has built up this film to fit nicely with The Avengers, which hopefully, is the film that these characters have been waiting for.

Written By Eammon Jacobs

Scott Pilgrim Vs The World

Scott Pilgrim Vs The World

Directed By: Edgar Wright (Shaun OF The Dead, Hot Fuzz)

Written By: Edgar Wright, Michael Bacall

Produced By: Edgar Wright, Marc Platt, Eric Glitter, Nira Park

Cast: Michael Cera, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Jason Schwartzman, Kieran Culkin, Ellen Wong, Alison Pill, Mark Webber, Johnny Simmons, Anna Kendrick

Plot: When 23 year old Scott Pilgrim meets delivery girl Ramona Flowers, he falls head over heels for her. Unfortunately, he has a 17 year old chinese girlfriend, Knives Chau. And Ramona has seven evil exes that want to kill Scott.

Scott Pilgrim's script, isn't amazingly engrossing. But it's visual effects are dazzling enough for any Ibiza Rave. However, It is  fairly funny, inventive and will capture the younger audience's minds. The film is quite juvenile, and won't really attract an older audience, but for the younger audience it is funny and offbeat. Edgar Wright (Director) has made a fine mash up of a great cast, an average script and brilliant visual effects. The film is quite sweet in places (Scott is willing to fight 7 people to be with Ramona, aww.)and  fairly genuine in the fact that Michael Cera is once again in the geeky, individual role he plays so well. However, all the other actors, seemed a little awkward for their roles, they just didn't fit.

It is a new style of film in all fairness, combining video games with cinema, providing geeks with the ultimate   geek-a-thon. I was surprised with the amount of in jokes, hipster and pop culture references. The film lacked alot of its humour due to these references, as the majority of audiences didn't seem understand them.
The heights of Wright's previous films, for example Shaun Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz, are definately not reached here, and the magic of the film was almost lost by the conclusion to the movie. But it kept me entertained, and i did want to know what happened, and I admit, I wanted Scott to get the girl.

Its not a bad film, it's good if there is nothing else to watch, but it isn't an instant classic, maybe it will have a cult following in a few years.

Written By Eammon Jacobs