"Tranh and Nowak" - A Short, Independent, French, Martial Arts, Comedy Film

We love to promote great independent work here on The After Movie Diner and so please check out this awesome action, comedy short from director, Godefroy Ryckewaert.

Description:
"Tranh and Nowak" is an independent short-film by Godefroy Ryckewaert which he put together with the help of various friends. Quentin d'Hainault, the writer and the main male actor, and Godefroy come from the same martial art background : kungfu wushu.

Godefroy says "I just didn't know he was an actor and he didn't know I was a director".

When they realised, they put their passions together, mixing the cinema they both loved and martial arts, while still keeping a french touch to it.

They did a crowd-funding page on a European website called ULULE and earned 2,145 euros (the goal was 2000). They supplemented that by financing the rest themselves. It was shot over 7 days but took more than a year for post-production since all the work was done during their spare time.

They were very lucky and happy to get some of the best stunt players in France. They had worked on productions like Lucy, Taken, Fast and Furious, Bourne, etc.

Now they're just trying to get it seen on the web and want to present it to festivals as well.

We can't urge you enough to take a look below.



Biography:
GODEFROY RYCKEWAERT - DIRECTOR
Godefroy was born on August 24, 1986 in Lille, France. With a passion rooted in martial arts since the age of 16, he began training in various styles of Chinese kung fu, and eventually journeyed to China in 2004 to train for five years before ultimately becoming a national Wushu champion.

Ryckewaert began to experiment with directing amateur short films of his own and decided to become a full-fledged filmmaker. With this goal in mind, he hopes to further expand his body of work while aiming to become more actively involved in the film festival circuit. He plans to base his operations in the United States Of America.

He now spends most of his time behind the camera where his experience in martial arts and stunts are assets. Ryckewaert is also fluent in French, English and Mandarin Chinese.

Check out his website but it's still only in French.

and look at his demo reel

Top 10s - New York Movies

This article consists of 3 Top Ten New York Movie Lists, mine first and then guest bloggers Kylie Goetz and Andrew Morgan.
Scroll down for other lists.

Top 10 New York Movie Oddities

by Jon Cross

I love movies, spend 30 seconds on this site and I hope that’s abundantly obvious. I also love New York. The city I have called home for almost 7 years has been good to me and I sincerely feel like I belong here.

There are a ton of films I watched growing up that have defined New York for me. Travis Bickle’s cab going through the steam on a sleazy 42nd Street, Manhattan’s monochrome skyline accentuated by the strains of Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue, Dustin Hoffman’s "I’m walkin’ here!” from Midnight Cowboy, the Ghostbusters taking down a marshmallow sailor over on Central Park West, Harry dropping Sally off at Washington Sq Park, Robin Williams trying to get to Amanda Plumber among a sea of waltzing commuters in Grand Central Station in the sublime Fisher King and so on and so on.
There are plenty of blogs and lists out there that will rightfully sing the praises of these and other, famous, New York moments on film.

As I got older though, I discovered some New York films of the 80s that have a different sensibility to them. Genre films, grindhouse movies or gonzo filmmaking that used the run down and grimy corners of New York not to their detriment but as a back drop for weird and wonderful stories featuring a surprising cast of characters. I became familiar with filmmakers such as Bill Lustig, James Glickenhaus, Frank Henenlotter and Larry Cohen. So I wanted to put together a list that celebrated them and other oddball movies set in this fantastic city.
I probably love all the New York films you do, of course, but here are some that I think you should probably check out, if you haven’t already, that may not appear on many other, similar, lists.

10. C.H.U.D. - The creature from the black lagoon’s hillbilly cousins live under New York occasionally killing and eating random humans and it’s up to Daniel Stern (Celtic Pride), Kim Griest (Homeward Bound II: Lost in San Francisco) and John Heard (Deceived) to stop them. There are various attempts to make comments on the environment and homeless situation but really it’s all about the monsters, New York and John Goodman’s cameo as ‘Diner Cop’.
Interestingly enough, John Heard and Daniel Stern would later work with Macaulay Culkin and he would prove a much harder foe to destroy.

On a side note I got to see C.H.U.D. out the back of the divey-est of dive bars, near the port authority bus terminal and spitting distance from 42nd street. It was a tremendously ‘authentic’ experience!

9. Basket Case - This is a gloriously run down, 16mm monster movie. There definitely aren’t enough horror movies shot in New York. This is a shame because New York has, especially at the time this film was made, plenty of dark and filthy corners which could contain all the vileness a director could think up.
In the case of Basket Case, director Frank Henenlotter dreamt up a monster that looked like something he may have sneezed out during a particularly heinous case of the flu but which is meant to be the once conjoined twin brother of our lead protagonist, Duane Bradley (played by the unlikely named Kevin Van Hentenryck).
Belial, the evil twin beast, goes on a sexually frustrated rampage around the city while Duane holds up in the scummiest and seediest hotel that 42nd Street had to offer.

8. The Exterminator - I hope you’ll find, as I have done, that once you dip your toe into the world of James Glickenhaus, you can never have too much Glickenhaus. His films are gloriously grindhouse and enthusiastically explosive and violent while being tremendous fun.
Starring the strange faced, mumbly anti-hero you can’t help but root for, Robert Ginty, The Exterminator is sort of an even grimier Taxi Driver but with all the tormented, inward philosophising taken out and replaced with flame thrower interrogation, leaving thugs to be eaten to death by rats and dropping a guy into a meat grinder.
Hot on Ginty’s trail is police detective, love machine and budget William Shatner, Christopher George. If only Ginty wore less distinctive, special made footwear they may never have figured out who The Exterminator was.
Hear me talk with the legend James Glickenhaus on The After Movie Diner Podcast

7. Of Unknown Origin - One of many 'adulterous executive' roles for the thinking lady’s lord of the jazz, Peter “Buckeroo Banzai” Weller as he goes head to head with every New Yorker’s worst nightmare next to bed bugs, a giant, brownstone wrecking rat.
From the director of Cobra and Tombstone, George P. Cosmatos, this is a tense, repetitive but joyously mad 'man versus beast’ movie. In fact it hardly deviates from the rodent based, destructive mayhem, apart from a brief and unecessary affair with his secretary and an amazing dining room scene where Weller quotes endless, incredible rat facts to a startled room of stiff collars in his perfect, iconic drawl.
As one of the better films in the horror monster sub-genre of ‘rat movie’ the whole thing just becomes a bizarre, gonzo oddity with an ending that will leave you both bemused and applauding wildly.
Hear co-host Jon Wallace and myself talk about Of Unknown Origin on The After Movie Diner Podcast

6. The Last Dragon - Any time you get the opportunity to mix martial arts, music, magic and Mike Starr in a movie, you clearly have to take it. You also have to cast two leads that only use one name each. Thus was born Motown mogul Berry Gordy’s The Last Dragon. It’s a wonderfully bizarre concoction of action, ridiculous outfits, over acting villains and disco dancing.
Taimak plays Leroy Green, the highly trained, disciplined but nerdy kung fu fighter embroiled in a war he doesn’t want with the larger than life Sho’nuff (A.K.A "The Shogun of Harlem”) played by the heroically hammy Julius J. Carry III. One of them has to be the supreme master and old Sho and his army of similarly ludicrously attired hench-people will stop at nothing to find out who. The also mono-named Vanity plays the dancing diva with a heart of gold who falls for the naive Leroy.
Considering the Blaxploitation heyday was 10 years passed by the time this was released, it stands tall and virtually alone as a favourite for anyone who grew up in the 80s but especially young African Americans who would rarely see themselves depicted as a lead in a movie like this, at that time.
It has been touring throughout 2015 celebrating its 30th year and even got a fantastic Blu ray release.
Hear me talk about The Last Dragon and diverse, action cinema with creator of the Urban Action Showcase, Demetrius Angelo on The After Movie Diner Podcast

5. Maniac Cop - Bringing together the powerhouse talents of writer Larry Cohen, producer James Glickenhaus, director Bill Lustig and stars Tom Atkins, Richard Roundtree, Laurene Landon, Robert Z’Dar and Bruce Campbell, Maniac Cop is a city based slasher icon that is sadly left out when people are banging on about Freddy, Jason or Michael.
It has delicious subplots, a complicated but fantastically, cliche riddled back story for its villain and is filmed, very often completely guerrilla style, on the streets of New York, including during the St.Patrick’s Day parade!
It even has a cameo from Sam “For The Love Of The Game” Raimi and spawned two fantastically nutso sequels!
Hear me talk to Bill Lustig all about the Maniac Cop trilogy and his career on The After Movie Diner Podcast

4. Vigilante - Thanks to Death Wish, Taxi Driver and the horrendous crime statistics in New York at the time, vigilantes were running about the place avenging themselves on gangs of bizarrely clothed hoodlums like Batman at a rowdy bar mitzvah.
You don’t get much cooler than the genre icon double act of Robert “The alligator slayer” Forster and Fred “The Hammer” Williamson going after a bunch of Che Guevara wannabes on the dangerous streets of the outer boroughs of the big apple.
Bill Lustig again directs and the ante is upped by not only featuring the, legitimately shocking, murder of Forster’s 8 yr old son but also by his wife leaving him. The judicial system is filled with corruption and villainy itself and so, with nowhere else to turn, Forster joins The Hammer’s neighbourhood crime stopping efforts to hunt down the people who destroyed his life an enact furious vengeance all over their stupid bodies.
Hear Dr.Action and me talk to Fred “The Hammer” Williamson about Vigilante and other films in his awesome career on The After Movie Diner Podcast

3. Lonely Guy - New York has become the rom com city of choice in recent years due, in no small part, to Woody Allen’s 80s output and When Harry Met Sally and so I felt I had to pick a comedy or rom com of sorts. The weirdest but also funniest of the bunch is this Steve Martin and Charles Grodin starring film that I feel has been largely forgotten.
Based on a book, which I haven’t read, the movie features some hilarious dialogue, some really odd sight gags and a slightly dark sense of humour. It only falters when it attempts to become actually romantic, which it thankfully doesn’t do much (and even then with a knowing wink) but for the park bench dialogues between Grodin and Martin alone the film is worth its inclusion here.

2. Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop - 80s and 90s Grindhouse action film king, James Gickenhaus shows us what happens when undercover narc cop Sam “Dog Killer” Elliot, be-bopping, adulterous (again), attorney Peter “I’m putting the law on trial” Weller and a sleazy 42nd Street collide.
This film is all over the place, action, New York Exploitation brilliance from its low key Central Park start through to its Sam Elliot hanging onto the wheels of a plane, gloriously implausible ending.
It doesn’t get better than the escape from a flea pit, movie theatre on the deuce and the ensuing motorbike and sidecar chase through a cardboard city by the river and ending with Sam Elliot making a car explode by shooting it a bit.
The movie is so utterly bonkers and fast paced you joyously throw your hands up and go along with the ride safe in the knowledge that you’re in the good hands of Elliot, Weller and Glickenhaus. This should’ve been a franchise.
Hear me talk with the legend James Glickenhaus on The After Movie Diner Podcast
AND
Hear co-host Jon Wallace and me discuss Shakedown on The After Movie Diner Podcast

1. Q The Winged Serpent - The top spot has to belong to Larry Cohen’s masterpiece Q. I unabashedly adore this movie.
Michael Moriarty’s insanely well played, skittish piano player and a prehistoric, giant, flying, lizard god terrorise New York and only Shaft, Caine from Kung-Fu and an undercover mime can stop them!

Larry Cohen’s bonkers monster movie may be the very best film to ever come out of a premise like that. The acting from Moriarty should seriously win awards for the finest in all of Exploitation cinema and, considering the budget, the effects and location work are excellent.

Like all of Cohen’s work and, indeed a lot of the films on this list, there are comments and subplots throughout that either deal with city corruption or the crumbling society. None of these films are simple exploitation and all either have something to say about the times or are an incredible catalogue of the times when, some feel, New York City WAS New York City before Disney moved in.
I, personally, feel that you can still find corners of the city with dive bars, diners or where B Movies are playing and yeah you may have to look a little harder but the experience is still there to be had, for the most dedicated of fan. Also you can live that lifestyle with very little threat of being stabbed in the face, harassed by a sex worker or stuck with a hypodermic full of either disease or drugs. So, bonus! Come to New York!!

Read my full review of Q The Winged Serpent HERE
and hear Doug Tilley, Moe Porne and myself discuss the film on Drunk on VHS

____________________________________________________________

So this whole 'Top 10 of New York movies' idea came from a conversation I was having with poet extraordinaire and guest blogger Kylie Goetz. So I invited her to present her list and she also managed to get another list from her co-worker Andrew Morgan.

By way of contrast then and to bring up some other excellent suggestions of New York movies, here are Kylie’s and Andrew’s lists!

Kylie’s 10 NY Movies

by Kylie Goetz
Whittling it down wasn’t easy because there are so many New York movies and so many New York movie lists, I have chosen these simply as mine. I, of course, have left out many, many, many. It would be easier to name 100 than 10.
There maybe other iconic NY movies that are better made, better written and worthier films than the ones I picked but these are the ones that resonate with me.

My criteria was as follows:

• This one seems pretty obvious, but the action must predominantly take place somewhere in the five boroughs of NYC. 
• The setting is integral to the story; it can’t be moved to Ft. Lauderdale and work just as well. 
• There are some movies that are on everybody’s most iconic NY movie lists. I didn’t feel the need to repeat them. How could you leave out King Kong or Breakfast at Tiffany’s, you ask? I just did. Deal with it.
• I like it. (Dammit, it’s my top ten and while Coyote Ugly certainly fits my first two criteria, I’m not putting it on my freaking list.) 

So, with that said, here we go:
1. When Harry Met Sally -  The Washington Square Arch, Katz’s, the Central Park Boathouse, not being able to catch a cab on NYE, lugging an xmas tree down the sidewalk, the Met’s Temple of Dendur, Billy Crystal and Bruno Kirby in too tight exercise pants speed walking in Central Park, I love all of it!
Also in my top 3 movies of movies. Possibly the greatest rom-com of all time.

2. Both Ghostbusters - I’m combining 1 and 2 under this because while the first is my preferred, the second has a stompy Lady Liberty and that’s pretty awesome. Also gooey rage sewers, that’s pretty New York.

3. Coming to America - It’s set in Jackson Heights. I live in Jackson Heights.
****It’s also very funny. In case you didn’t know.****

4. The Muppets Take Manhattan - Gregory Hines on skates in Central Park, Joan Rivers as a perfume counter salesgirl, diners and Broadway, frogs and dogs and bears and chickens and... and whatever!
This movie has everything.

5. The Clock - I definitely felt the need to include something older and I heart classic films. I considered more well-known choices like 42nd Street or On the Town, but I unabashedly love this movie. Joe Allen is a soldier with two days of leave and meets Judy Garland. She shows him around New York and they get married before he ships off for WWII. It’s sappy and I’m a big sap. Also, my folks have a similar story but in a different city and a different war. Pivotal scene and titular clock is at Grand Central.

6. Miracle on 34th Street - There’s a miracle and it’s on 34th Street. What else do you need?

7. Annie Hall - So, I debated this with someone… and while I agree that Manhattan might be considered more iconic and is freaking titled Manhattan; that movie creeps me out and Diane Keaton is fantastic, so I am sticking with Annie Hall.

8. Crocodile Dundee - This is one of my favorite outsider comes to the big city films. (May be biased as a half-Australian.)

9. Working Girl - Again, it certainly doesn’t need to be on anyone else’s NY movie list, and of course, the movie has flaws. Some people seriously hate it and, honestly, my favorite characters in this movie were always the secondary ones. But when I was a kid, nothing said New York to me more that Joan Cusack’s sneakers/heel shoe change and Carly Simon singing, “Let the River Run.” Also, Alec Baldwin at the height of his deliciousness.

10. Brighton Beach Memoirs - This was a bit of a toss-up for me. Neil Simon had to be on this list somewhere and Barefoot in the Park is very New York and also delightful but Brighton Beach Memoirs encapsulates growing up in the city in such a specific and amazing way – it won out.

Movies that would be on my larger list: Beat Street, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, Scrooged, Do the Right Thing, How to Marry a Millionaire, The Apartment, 3 Days of the Condor, the rest of the Neil Simon movies… And still there’s Wall Street, Gangs of New York, Guys and Dolls, Arthur, Saturday Night Fever, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum.

Kylie has an excellent 'word of the day' poetry blog where she writes a whole new poem every single day! It’s awesome. Check it out HERE
You can also follow her on Twitter to keep up with each poem and each word!
____________________________________________________________

Andrew’s Top 10 Iconic NYC Films

by Andrew Morgan
I echo all of the criteria elements suggested by Kylie’s list with the exception of these being films I like, not that anyone else will:

• Predominantly taking place in one of the five boroughs 
• Setting integral to the story 
• Not necessarily on everyone’s list 
• I like it 

1. Igby Goes Down (2002) – closest thing you can get to a film version of The Catcher in the Rye. Who doesn’t wish they just had a day to wander the city finding trouble to get into?

2. American Psycho (2000) – what screams NYC more than white collar sociopathic murder, graphic sex, and a Huey Lewis soundtrack?

3. Wolf of Wall Street (2013) – there were certainly others before it, but this one nails it. Perfect balance of humor, drama, and wit showcasing the popular success/failure theme of Wall Street ambition.

4. Requiem for Dream (2000) – Coney Island isn’t all fun and sun. No better film explores the dark corners of the human psyche as driven by the influence of addiction.

5. The Godfather (1972) – the pioneer film of organized crime dramas and Italian immigrant influence on popular American culture.

6. RENT (2005) – the struggle is real.

7. Big (1988) – you only have to look like you’re old enough to make it here, no one ever said you have to act like it. This is basically my life philosophy.

8. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990) – we all wonder about what’s really down under the manhole covers. This film seems like a reasonable suggestion. I must admit it doesn’t fully meet criteria B, but I get one freebie. It was an integral part of my youth.

9. Finding Forrester (2000) – subtle take on themes of race and friendship through the perspective of two writers facing adversity in different ways.

10. Friends with Benefits (2011) – had to include a NYC rom-com and well....Justin and Mila just do it for me a lot more than Tom and Meg.

Honorable Mentions: First Wives Club (1996), Ghost (1993), Cruel Intentions (1999), Harriet the Spy (1996), Inside Man (2006), The Squid and the Whale (2005), Black Swan (2010), Whiplash (2014), Sleepless in Seattle (1993), You’ve Got Mail (1998), Great Expectations (1998), Ghostbusters (1984) 

*The only film I really wanted to include but wasn’t sure if it qualified based on the criteria outlined, was The Royal Tenenbaums. Parts of it were certainly filmed in NY and the setting certainly has NYC elements, I don’t think the location is ever actually confirmed in the film and some iconic landmarks are intentionally removed

ALL NEW Video Reviews!

So I spent my Saturday watching 6 movies and it was glorious but, you know me by now, I can’t just watch movies all day and not have something to show for it, so I recorded two movie review videos!

Video one looks at a couple of OzSploitation classics and one recent B-Movie dud
I review Wyrmwood: Road of the Dead, Wolf Cop and Fair Game

and
Video two is all Italian Exploitation movies from the 80s and 90s
I review 1990: The Bronx Warriors, it’s sequel, Escape From the Bronx and the legitimate cult classic Cemetery Man AKA Dellamorte Dellamore.


Please please please give us feedback and let us know what you think of these videos in the comments below! Thanks!

These videos were brought to you by www.fastcustomshirts.com 
You can check out our music at miscplumbingfixtures.bandcamp.com
AND
Join the Facebook group here: facebook.com/groups/AMDandDAATKAK/

The After Movie Diner Video Review 1 - Avengers 2: Age of Ultron

These were my initial thoughts on seeing the film. I hope to cover it in more depth on a podcast soon.

I am looking to do more video reviews so please suggestions suggestions. That would be great!

Kingsman: The Secret Service Preview Review

Just to let all who read on know, this is a SPOILER FREE review.

Kingsman: The Secret Service is a movie very loosely based on the comic book The Secret Service by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. The movie is written by Jane Goodman and Matthew Vaughn, who also directs. This is the same team behind the similar Millar comic adaptation, Kick Ass.
The film, unlike its unfortunate title, is anything but clunky. It is a slick, fun, R Rated, filthy humour and ultra violence filled romp that plays like an intentional love letter to Roger Moore era James Bond.

Kingsman in both its humour and action, plays a lot like Kick Ass did before it and like Kick Ass the movie contains plenty of awesome jaw dropping and taboo busting moments. Vaughn also repeats the trick of editing the fight scenes to a retro soundtrack that, while not exactly giving Guardians of the Galaxy a run for its money, is still damn cool.

The actors all appear to be having a great time and mostly play the whole thing straight, even when the situations are anything but. It's sad then that some of the dialogue is occasionally knowingly winking at the audience and slips into heavy handed referential moments. It never spoils the scenes outright but everyone should already be getting the joke without turning this into Austin Powers with gore. Colin Firth, Vaughn staple Mark Strong and newcomer Taron Egerton are all particularly superb. Firth, not always the first name you think of as cool or a fantastic ass kicker steps up in this and steals the show.

Samuel L Jackson's lisping, brightly costumed villain may be the tipping point for some because while he is undeniably fun and knowingly over the top, the film might have been better served by having someone with just a little bit more menace. You could still have the Bond villain like plot, mountain lair, henchmen and almost-superhuman sidekick with a singular weapon while having just a touch of genuine menace to the main, big bad. Even Donald Pleasence's Blofeld was sinister in his own way.

The directing is assured and excitable with the fight scenes, in particular, being a stand out because while they are very kinetic, you can tell exactly what is happening at all times. There's my usual reservation about CGI, especially where limb hacking or fake blood is concerned and something like Kill Bill 1's prosthetics and make up effects would've worked better here. The myriad of nods to old 60s and 70s romps, usually starring the perpetual eyebrow raising of one Sir Roger Moore or maybe Peter O'Toole, are a joy to anyone, like myself, that genuinely loves that kind of stuff or grew up with it. You can't be cynical in a film like this, be along for the ride or don't bother. It asks you to sit back, have fun and suspend belief from the opening scene onwards.

The nicest thing though about the whole thing was just how occasionally surprising it was and how it contains sequences and scenes you just can't quite believe you are watching on the big screen. Like Kick Ass, Vaughn and Goodman are unafraid to show you images that have been common place in some of the more fringe comic books but rarely, if ever, make it to the screen of your local multiplex. They also unashamedly put in the kind of jokes that you may tell your friends in a bar after a couple but, again, rarely if ever get an airing for mass consumption. It's a messy, exciting, enjoyable, cool, breezy breath of fresh air.

The Director, Matthew Vaughn, who briefly introduced the screening I was at, said that distributer Fox was unsure of its potential in America because the film was "very English". This may explain why Fox messed around with the release date a few times and why, sadly, the trailer spoils so much of the film attempting to 'explain' it. As for the Englishness or not of the film, I don't think Fox has anything to worry about. It will happily ride the wave of the current Anglophile (Brit loving geek) nostalgia boom that is sweeping America with the likes of TV Shows Sherlock, Dr.Who and Downton Abbey.
It also has more than a few echoes of James Bond which has always been a big hit in The States.
Plus it has every American's favourite older Brit Colin Firth in it being undeniably awesome and giving Liam Neeson a run for his money in the action stakes.
If there is one very British aspect to the movie it's that it has absolutely no regard for authority and is joyously, ridiculously subversive on all fronts. It certainly will make you either proud to be British again or wish you were British, which certainly makes a change from the Brits always playing villains.

The audience I was with applauded several times throughout and very loudly at the end. If you enjoyed Kick Ass, like Dr.Who/Sherlock, like James Bond, like comic books or long for the days when movies were made for the kid inside every adult and not just for dumb kids then Kingsman is for you.

I would strongly urge anyone now intending to see it on its US release date of February 13th 2015 to avoid the trailers as much as possible and go in fresh. Your experience will be enhanced greatly. 

Remember the days when trailers didn't spoil the whole first 2 acts of a film?

4 out of 5 bullet proof umbrellas

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

SPOILER FREE
What has been levelled at this film, in the press, is the fact that there's product placement and the fact that the character, once choosing to engage with life, undergoes crazy, dangerous and reckless feats with seemingly little or no psychological repercussion.
Some of that is true and I at least see where it's coming from, although I would argue that the product placement in the movie is the ok kind, the real kind. For example there IS a website called EHarmony on which single people date and people do eat Papa John's pizzas (presumably) and if you're setting a film in the world in which we currently live it's not unreasonable to expect characters might interact with products, restaurants or websites much like we do every day. I'd rather that than changing names to DaddyJoe's Pizza or ECompatibility or something. The bad kind of product placement is when characters casually drop names of products into conversations like 'It's an Omega actually' with it having no bearing on the plot, like an advert on the TV (James Bond Casino Royale).

The other point that Walter Mitty is surprisingly brave, all of a sudden, for a middle aged schlub, once the plot demands it of him, is slightly true but, to be honest, it is done in such a charming way, to the strains of Kristen Wiig giving a kick ass, inspirational rendition of David Bowie's Space Oddity and you are so rooting for him, at the point it happens in the film, that you go along with it. Anything more drawn out or believable would stop the incredible, exuberant and brilliant pacing of this film. Well, it didn't bother me anyway.

You, as an audience member, are meant to be inspired by Mitty's seemingly over-the-top, exciting and probably expensive, real experiences in the same way Mitty is inspired by the fantasy life he has earlier in the movie. Watch it like that and it's better.

All that being said, The Secret Life Of Walter Mitty is the best film Ben Stiller has ever made as a director. Are Tropic Thunder, Zoolander and The Cable Guy much funnier? yes, of course, Walter Mitty is not strictly just a comedy but in terms of juggling multiple themes and multiple styles, while telling an engaging and fun story and making it look incredible and beautiful? THIS is his best work to date.
Also people worried that it might be too soppy, or too simplistic, too overly sentimental or too silly... it's, thankfully, none of those things. It's a surprising, fun, entertaining, enjoyable comedy drama with wonderful fantasy elements and lots of sweetness and surprise. Kristen Wiig is also an unparalleled delight, proving herself, again to be more than just a fantastic comedienne but an actress to watch and respect.

Turn off your cynical or ironic glands, relax and get carried away watching this enchanting, midlife-crisis-as-a-fairytale movie.

8 out of 10

13/13/13

Let me start by saying that James Cullen Bressack's film 13/13/13, released by The Asylum, has, at its core, a GREAT idea. At a time when the Horror and Sci-fi genres seem plagued by remakes, copy cats and irony filled shark attack films, even from so-called first time or indie talent, 13/13/13 has this great horror sci-fi concept.

Basically it's all something to do with leap years violating  the ancient Mayan calendar and all those extra days in February, over time have created an extra month and on the date of 13/13/13 everyone who wasn't born on a February 29th goes completely nuts.

It's a wonderful, end of the world scenario that allows for lots of death, destruction, mayhem and the symbolism of the "unlucky number" 13. More importantly, I hadn't really heard of much like that before and it's always nice to hear a fresh idea.
Yes, ok, so behind the idea is the whole Mayan calendar hoopla that went around last year claiming that, in 2012, the world was going to end and, I'm sure that, The Asylum liked it for that reason, as they're always making B-Movie versions of big budget disaster films (or Mockbusters as I believe the affectionate term is for them) but this has a decent spin on that and actually attempts something novel with it. The idea that leap years added up would form this weird 13 month is just the kind of bonkers, surreal hokum I am drawn to. There was a bit of George A Romero's The Crazies mixed in there as well but it's, at least, a different Romero source to draw from than the interminable bad zombie films we've had to wade through lately.

The things that I enjoyed in this film were the slow build up to people going crazy, some good and, on some occasions, even darkly comic deaths, a nice, atmospheric, gory and weird hospital sequence and attempts to establish different types of craziness for different groups of people. There was a really strong bedrock here for a pretty decent end-of-the-world horror film and what the filmmakers were able to do with, what was, obviously, a limited budget was, also, very impressive.

What was a slight disappointment with the movie, for me, was the fact that, I didn't feel, the concept went anywhere or was explored as much as I would've liked. For example, it needed a crazy old professor, or someone, who knew about the old world and spouted Donald Pleasance-like doom filled one-liners. The film, definitely, could've done with some sort of further explanation of the situation or some place to go. Maybe a glimmer of hope to reverse the situation using a mystical rock, Mayan gold amulet or something, or, maybe the rising of old beings to establish their order again on earth.
As it was, while it was atmospheric, gory as all hell and nicely shot, the hospital sequence went on entirely too long and once our two, Feb 29th born, protagonists finally escaped there was little time for anything but a muddled and, I felt, rushed finale back at the house.

The acting was a problem in the film. I watch a lot of amateur and low budget films so it doesn't bother me a lot but the acting was pretty stale, unfortunately, and not one character really shone in the film. A lot of that might have been the script too because, while the idea was there and the deaths, gore and action were all there, the dialogue was, in places, dreadful. I thought that more creative ways could've been used to convey the craziness other than just rage and repeated uses of "fuck" said unconvincingly by actors struggling to act. Don't get me wrong, there were some creative bits of craziness, especially Quentin (Jody Barton) believing himself, suddenly, to be a Korean war general but overall the swearing and the anger felt forced in some of the performances. I liked the laughter and the random acts of violence but thought the opportunity to make that truly creepy was missed.
Without a few strong, decent lines of dialogue and the odd interesting character, the film did, very slowly, become something of a slog but there was, genuinely, some nice potential here.

Trae Ireland and Erin Coker were solid enough, but neither of them had very interesting characters. Calico Cooper is Alice Cooper's daughter but sadly didn't get to do very much but what she did was fine though. Jody Barton got the showy role and was, at least, enthusiastic with it and, probably, the strongest performer of the lot. Bill Voorhees, with the name made for horror film acting, was sort of funny in the role of sidekick to Jody Barton despite it being an underwritten, obvious, slob-friend role.

My favourite scenes in the whole thing were an early scene where Quentin decides to humorously run some people down with his car, the slowly escalating crazy in the hospital and its gore drenched walls and the news room scene with the comedy news anchors attacking each other. They were all, a genuine joy.

While it, sadly, does go nowhere, there was lots to like in this B-Movie. One positive on the acting was that I didn't feel anybody was winking at me or playing any scenes in a lazy, half-arsed manner. I felt that everyone was trying their hardest and playing the scenes straight and true. This is important because it's become all too fashionable these days, even amongst high-profile stuff like Tarantino and Rodriguez's later work, to knowingly and lazily play every scene just for puerile, pathetic and ironic laughter and, for me, that just takes me right out of the film. While the acting isn't always strong or dynamic, I am glad to say 13/13/13 doesn't do this. The key to making a fun, enjoyable, weird, silly, wonderful, cult or B-Movie is to believe in what you're doing, no matter how ridiculous and, again, this film does succeed in that regard.

While not quite there completely I appreciated this film for it's attempt at a different, creative take on an apocalypse scenario. It was an enjoyable romp, some great scenes, some good enthusiasm and a decent idea at its core.

All Is Lost: 2 FREE MOVIE TICKETS & Interactive Movie Poster

Yes The After Movie Diner has ANOTHER GIVEAWAY available for its loyal readers! The chance to win 2 Free Movie tickets to the latest Robert Redford starring action thriller All Is Lost.

Plot Synopsis: Academy Award® winner Robert Redford stars in All Is Lost, an open-water thriller about one man’s battle for survival against the elements after his sailboat is destroyed at sea. But with the sun unrelenting, sharks circling and his meager supplies dwindling, the ever-resourceful sailor soon finds himself staring his mortality in the face.
Written and directed by Academy Award nominee J.C. Chandor (Margin Call) with a musical score by Alex Ebert (Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros), All Is Lost is a gripping, visceral and powerfully moving tribute to ingenuity and resilience.
All Is Lost opens in NY and LA October 18, nationwide October 25th.

Reviewers say: 
“OFF THE SCALE BRILLIANT” - Emma Pritchard Jones. THE HUFFINGTON POST

"ROBERT REDFORD DELIVERS A TOUR DE FORCE PERFORMANCE” - Pete Hammond. DEADLINE

Watch the Trailer:

ENTERING THE GIVEAWAY:
In order to be eligible to win you must do 1 of the following
1. Share your personal ALL IS LOST survival story! Has there ever been a time where you thought... All Is Lost? Please post your stories in our comments section for a giveaway entry.
2. Share the All Is Lost poster or your favourite Gif from above on your blog, Twitter, Pinterest, Tumblr or Facebook and include a link to www.aftermoviediner.com, then post us a link to it in the comments below.
3. Share your favourite After Movie Diner or Dr.Action and the Kick Ass Kid article, podcast, review or piece of news on your blog, Twitter, Pinterest, Tumblr or Facebook and let us know about it.

it's that simple!

Competition ends October 27th, 2013 and is only available in the U.S. & Canada.
Each household is only eligible to win 2 Free Movie Tickets via blog reviews and giveaways. Only one entrant per mailing address per giveaway. If you have won the same prize on another blog, you will not be eligible to win it again. Winner is subject to eligibility verification.

Gravity

When I saw the trailers for Gravity, each of them brilliant, short, panicky glimpses of a desperate situation, I had no idea what to expect from the finished film.
"How is this a movie?" I thought. "What happens? How can they just sustain that for 90 minutes?" Then I factored in the heavyweight star power in the film and really couldn't guess what was going to happen.
All I knew, was that I was going to see that film as soon as possible.
It was a refreshing inner monologue to have because after most film trailers, even for films I am interested in still seeing, I know, pretty much what is going to happen in the film by the end and what kind of film it is. Gravity was different though. I didn't have a clue.

I am a big fan of Alfonso Cuarón's dystopian action drama Children of Men and he's the only man to make a satisfactory Harry Potter film so I knew, with the director, I was in safe and interesting hands. I am also an unabashed George Clooney disciple, believing the man to have pretty impeccable taste in scripts and projects to work on (seriously, listen to my 'When Clooney met the Coens podcast' he's my man crush). Sandra Bullock is a great comedienne and can pretty much raise the standard of any generic rom-com or action-com she takes part in. I haven't seen a lot of her "serious, worthy" films and I don't want to but "an interesting choice" I thought and a good fit with Clooney.
So what was going to happen in this mysterious space film?

Well, I am not going to tell you here. If you're looking for spoilers or plot points then you've come to the wrong place because it's best to go into Gravity fresh and ready for anything. What I can tell you is that it is one of the most breath taking, nerve shredding, tension sustaining, technically advanced and most complex directed film, I think, I have ever seen. I would need to watch it again, not because of any twisty turny story developments but to try and wrap my brain around just the level of organisation and unfathomable skill that went into creating this heart pounding 90 minutes.
It is a sublime magic trick of a film because, unlike the cartoonish nonsense of, say, Avatar or Abrams' Star Trek you just, quite reasonably, assume that Clooney, Bullock and Cuarón filmed the whole thing in ACTUAL SPACE. Cuarón realises that to wow and amaze with CGI and modern special effects, you don't need to go hog wild and create insane worlds and multi-headed monsters, just make a seemingly realistic and simple film, set in space. He did the same thing to similar wonderful effect in Children of Men. It's not what you see, it's what you don't realise you've seen. You take everything for granted in a Cuarón film and buy the world completely, it's only later that you stop and think "Wait?! how on EARTH did they do that?!"
In an age where everyone knows "oh yeah, they just draw that stuff on a computer, right?" (you know, like ANYONE could do it effortlessly) it takes real skill to hush those tongues and drag the audience, spellbound and quiet as amazed church mice, into your film.

There is a similar trick that the story pulls and that is that, with so few cast members, you know somebody, logically and presumably, is making it to the end of this film alive but that never holds you back from being on the edge of your seat, biting your knuckles or gripping the hand of your loved one next to you, every time peril rears it's ugly head.

Peril's ugly head

The acting, too, is fantastic, with Sandra Bullock, especially, giving, to quote EVERY critic on the planet, the performance of her career. Hell! the performance of anyone's career! For the physical strain, it must have been to make this film, alone she deserves all the Oscars Billy Crystal can quickly polish and shove into the back of a Lexus. That's not to say Clooney's a slouch but it becomes pretty apparent why they cast him after just a few lines of dialogue, in a pleasing, welcome way.

Again, like Children of Men, the film is a mix of genres. It gave me more of a jolt and locked me rigid with tension more than any horror film of recent times, it has enough action in it to please any of John McClane's ardent admirers and it's also an achingly beautiful science fiction film, with critics throwing around 2001: A Space Odyssey comparisons like happy, pretentious puppies with a Kubrick designed squeeze toy. It may just be Clooney, the minimalist cast and an emotional theme of the film but referencing Solaris, in an attempt to seem smart and educated, might be slightly more apt actually.

It is in the emotional, character based thread of the film's narrative, though, that the first tiny, critical comment must be made because the slightly over-egged and obvious motivations of Bullock's character and the emotional journey she undertakes, is not as deep, fleshed out, or as relevant as the film thinks it is. I would argue it's the physical journey, and the mental struggle and dilemma that produces, that is a more satisfying and watchable than her emotional one. However, like all good sci-fi, there's lots of layers to the thing and you can enjoy what you want about it. I just didn't think the script or dialogue was particularly strong when dealing with a certain topic, that will remain unnamed here.

It's a film all about connections though, in more ways than one, and the ultimate connection we must make with our own lives. That being said, it's also, pleasingly, about hair raising stunts and explosions in space. Unusually, if I urge you to go see this film at all, it's for that, latter reason, the sheer, jaw dropping, spectacle of it all.

Bounty Killer DVD Giveaway

This is the age of the BOUNTY KILLER.
Bounty killers compete for body count, fame and a fat stack of cash. They're ending the plague of corporate greed and providing the survivors of the apocalypse with retribution.

Based on the graphic novel, Bounty Killer follows the exploits of Mary Death, the leading Bounty Killer on the scene.

It’s been 20 years since the corporations took over the world’s governments. Their thirst for power and profits led to the corporate wars, a fierce global battle that laid waste to society as we know it. Born from the ashes, the Council of Nine rose as a new law and order for this dark age. To avenge the corporations’ reckless destruction, the Council issues death warrants for all white collar criminals. Their hunters: the bounty killers!

Starring:

Kristanna Loken

Gary Busey

Eve

Beverly D'Angelo

and... Christian Pitre as Mary Death!

It’s Mad Max meets Grindhouse while getting slashed by 

Kill Bill!

WANT YOUR CHANCE TO WIN A DVD COPY OF BOUNTY KILLER?

Then all you have to do is either:

1) Take the 'Could you be a bounty killer?' quiz below and post your results in the comments section below.

OR

2) Share your favourite BOUNTY KILLER Gifs (below) or the poster on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest or Tumblr (including a link back to your favourite review/podcast page of The After Movie Diner) and post the link below in the comments section. 
OR
3) Tell us in 5 words why you want to see BOUNTY KILLER and in another 5 words the things you like about The After Movie Diner in the comments section below.
Only one copy up for grabs so make your post eye-catching!

Competition ends 09/26/2013

Bounty Killer is in theaters and VOD September 6. Go see it!

You're Next

I would count myself as a reasonably hardcore horror fan but ask me about most so-called horror past things like Saw 1, Cabin Fever or Final Destination and I would draw a blank. I am sure there are films out there that I am missing (although I dip my toes back into the genre from time to time) but mostly the films seem to be grindhouse style rip-offs of exploitation films, found footage films, gritty, grimy, greeny/brown and gross films, torture porn, CGI fuelled messes, fast zombies, tweeny PG-13 crap or, of course the dreaded remake and all of those, quite frankly, can fuck off. I have little to no interest in any of that stuff.

Now I had the unabashed, joyful pleasure to interview Barbara Crampton last year about her work with Stuart Gordon in the 80s (some of my favourite of the genre) and the restarting of her career with Lords of Salem and You're Next.
You can HEAR that EXCLUSIVE interview HERE.
Sadly she was cut out of Lords of Salem but, thankfully, she remained very much in You're Next. So, of course, I was going to see it. It could've been a torture porn remake featuring a fast zombie falling love with a drippy teen made in the grindhouse style and I still would've been there with bells on. Barbara Crampton's return to our cinemas needed to be seen and supported. No question.

Well I couldn't be happier to report that, firstly, You're Next is none of the above and, secondly, it is a resounding success.
An entertaining, independently spirited, horror, comedy, action film that, although obviously has lots of familiar genre staple moments, is, thankfully, not knowing, winking, referencing or particularly derivative of any one thing.
The acting and direction are assured, the gore effects pleasingly devoid of CGI, the humour comes from a very real human place not a silly, contrived place and the tension is satisfyingly maintained throughout.

The best praise I can give this film is that it is just solid, decent, well made entertainment, the kind we so rarely get to see and, while none of it is exactly, what you could call, a huge surprise, to the initiated, I still had a tremendously good time with the film. I laughed out loud, I jumped, I felt nervous and was, on occasion, sufficiently creeped out.
I love that. So cool when a film can achieve that.

The cast, across the board, are great in their roles with stand out mentions going to Barbara Crampton, of course, Joe Swanberg, AJ Bowen and a tour de force from Sharni Vinson as the kick ass heroine ready to fight back.

The score and soundtrack, especially in the second half, is a sheer delight and was evocative of Goblin or Carpenter in just the right way.

Apart from one scene of heightened panic the camera did not veer into amateurish shaky cam, thank goodness and, in fact, I loved the way the film was directed, shot and edited. It has definitely made me want to check out Adam Wingard and Simon Barrett's other work and keep a close eye on what they do in the future. There's not a lot of flourishes or showing off, just strong, simple, clear direction. Fantastic job.

I can't urge people enough to go and see this in the theatre.
A lot of talk is thrown around these days about how horror fans need to support new, independent horror and quit their complaining that there is nothing new and good out there.
Well, seemingly, what horror fans actually end up doing, sadly, is throwing hard earned cash at remakes and then attacking anyone who says they don't want to see them because we shouldn't "pre-judge".
Justify it how you like but you are throwing money at marketing companies who make a tenth rate, weak sauce, copy of a previous classic, with no care or understanding as to what made the original so charming and ingenious, slap the same name on it, throw it into cinemas and sit back to watch the coin come rolling in.
One of the trailers before You're Next was the Carrie remake and oh dear oh dear oh dear that looks to be one of the most insipid, uninspired, pathetic looking, unoriginal and beige remakes yet. I think Carrie and Evil Dead are vying for the top spot of most redundant and pointless remake of 2013. The kicker is that, in the Carrie trailer, they even show, in slow-mo no less, the pigs blood at the prom scene and it's 'we-want-a-lower-rating-please' black. Sludgy, boring black.
Imagine my absolute sheer, fan boy, delight then when You're Next starts and the blood is thick, gooey, vibrant RED! YES! Hallelujah! YES!

So, please, GO SEE THIS FILM. NOW. Go and enjoy. This is what entertainment looks like. This is what new, independent, horror worth supporting looks like. Go out there, watch it and spread the word. Please. If the Carrie remake makes more than You're Next and if you bypass You're Next in the theatre but go and see Carrie, I don't care your excuse, you are a very very bad person and you should be utterly ashamed.

8.5 out of 10

The Wolverine

After a slew of disappointing summer blockbusters it fills me with great joy that I can finally write a positive review for one.
For those of you who don't know I am something of a fan of the original X Men trilogy and I go into detail about it on the latest 2-part epic X-Men episode of the podcast from The After Movie Diner.

The 1st part deals with the main X-men Trilogy We ALSO talk Man of Steel and Pacific Rim a little too.

RIGHT CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD MP3 OF PART 1

The 2nd part deals with X-Men Origins: Wolverine, X-Men: First Class and The Wolverine
RIGHT CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD MP3 OF PART 2

However, I feel that the two prequel films Origins: Wolverine and First Class add very little to the franchise (although First Class is vastly superior to Origins, of course). It was with a little bit of trepidation then that I went to see the new instalment of the franchise, The Wolverine.

It's basically a sequel to X3: The Last Stand while also giving you more back story, more character and more information about the nature and personality of Logan/Wolverine, it's also the age old comic-book story of 'Superhero loses powers and learns deep abiding truths and the value and responsibility of wielding that power' but it tells it the best way I have ever seen that story told AND it's also a 70s Yakuza film complete with operatic and Shakespearean family drama, some sword wielding and, yes, even ninjas. It has a lot to accomplish, including being an entertaining comic-book, action, blockbuster film and it manages it all with grace, skill, awesome performances, mature pacing and an adult, serious slant.

It's not filled to bursting with whizz crash bangery but when the action and fighting take place it's awesome, especially in the first couple of acts. I have to say that the ending climax seemed a little flat to me and while there were lots of cool moments, as a whole it felt underwhelming after the fights that had come before.

Although it's PG-13, the film is more adult in tone and in pacing. It's slower, it doesn't talk down to the audience and, in fact, even has quite a bit of swearing and some mild gore, certainly more than any of the previous films. Anyone remember those three tiny cut marks on Mystique after Wolverine was meant to have stabbed her back in X1? well them days are long gone, thankfully, although the film-makers don't spill half as much crimson as would actually be spraying everywhere if this was real.

I know there are some out there who wish Fox and Marvel would get off the whole Wolverine kick and give someone else a chance in the limelight but this is truly the film the character and the patient, loyal Jackman deserve and he is particularly excellent in this film. Hugh Jackman has kept this character on when many other actors might have fled and despite the questionable turn of events in X-Men Origins, ignoring that, there is a wonderful continuity throughout the other 5 films that is continued and developed here.
In fact, considering the desire of a studio to often make these films 'stand alone' there is a certain plot strand involving Jean Grey that you really have to have seen, at least, the original trilogy to appreciate.

I felt this instalment added more to Wolverine's character than ever before and finally all the pieces for me, as a non comic book reader and just a movie goer, fell into place. Jackman does a wonderful job of conveying Logan's journey like we haven't seen before.

I can't fault the direction or the performances much at all, Rila Fukushima especially is a great sidekick that I hope crops up again one day, and while the script, much like previous films in the franchise, does a great job of juggling all the plot, character development, back story and action, it has a harder time finding good, decent, crowd pleasing one liners for Jackman to growl on, chew up and spit out with glee. There are attempts but nothing truly satisfying and it's been this way since X-Men 1. Someone needs to do an anti-hero cheesy one-liner punch up on the script. Get Schwarzenegger's old writers on it or something!

Also, MORE NINJA FIGHTING!!

Apart from that I can't suggest you see The Wolverine too highly. It's a good time at the cinema but avoid the 3D it really does add absolutely nothing, sadly.

8 out of 10 adamantium wolf meat kabab skewers

Pacific Rim

To be honest I am not going to write a big long review for this one. I have said my piece on this film on the podcast a couple of times and apparently it's even started to piss people off, which is hilarious as it's just an opinion but if you want to know, completely, what I thought then you can listen below to the Diner episode devoted to it:


RIGHT CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD MP3

In a nutshell, though, I thought Pacific Rim was a badly structured, badly paced, badly acted and badly written film that had a few, really good, robot fighting monster sequences that were, sadly, not serviced by the film around them. 

You can throw all effects, lighting, dramatic music and wobbly camera you want at the screen, if the build up and the dramatic tension isn't there and if you don't give two rabid owl hoots for your protagonists then all your work will be in vain.

It's not like it's difficult to do either. Hell! even the odd Chuck Norris movie can elicit a fist clench and a manly cheer, from the right crowd, during the action climax and he wonders through his films like a lobotomised clothes rack of pale skin attached to a comical moustache. 

Dammit, I really hate to say it but as woeful and ineptly made as it was, even Sharknado worked out the formula for how to be entertaining as all heck and structure a 'monsters-attack' movie in such a way that it's actually, in parts, exciting. 

I know its supporters hate the comparison but Independence Day is the modern blueprint for these disaster/alien attack films, whether they like it or not, and one of the script writers on Pacific Rim certainly thought so as they borrow, wholesale, vast chunks of the plot, script and ideas from Roland Emmerich's fun action/disaster/alien invasion flick. Unfortunately they seem to have done so and then dropped all the pages of the script, shuffled them up and put them back together in such a way that they don't really work or they just shuffled them around in the hope that no one noticed the comparison. Like an amateurish Tarantino might.

 (please notice in that previous paragraph I said 'modern blueprint', I AM aware all these movie formulas date back to H.G.Wells novel War of the Worlds)

The cast of 'plucked from TV' actors fall, sadly, into the bland, confused or, in the case of the anti-funny Charlie Day, just plain annoying and aggressively drown-able.  Ron Perlman does his best to liven up proceedings but gets, really, very little to do.

It's shot ok, there are some sections that are very impressive to look at and then there are some that are edited poorly and render the whole thing just a series of confusing flashes of neon. On the whole though the action was pretty well done considering it was entirely built inside a computer.

I would argue, though, that if you're thinking, even for a moment, "wait? their robot has a sword?? and it can cut through monsters like they are cheap, knock off, vinyl handbags? Why haven't they been using this all along" or maybe "why do the plasma guns take such an annoyingly long time to load and then run out of ammo so easily? This is the future, it's make believe, why do they not have ever lasting plasma guns or, 15 plasma canons strapped to their robot faces??" then the film hasn't done its job of suspending disbelief and instead is dragging and appalling enough for you to notice these things and ask these questions.

I'll stop attacking it now and just basically end by saying, while I enjoyed the robot versus monster stuff a bit, it didn't justify the long running time or the pain of sitting through bland, confused or just plain bad actors massacring shitty dialogue. 

3 out of 10 fried alien lizard burgers

World War Z

FAIRLY SPOILER FREE
When I say 'I like Zombie films' I realise, now, that I am talking about really only a handful of movies. George A Romero's original trilogy, Lucio Fulci's Zombie, The Living Dead at the Manchester Morgue, Re-Animator, The Return of the Living Dead and that's more or less it. There are probably a few more I am not thinking of right now and probably a few from the genre's heyday that I haven't seen yet but I list these films merely to shed light on where and who this review is coming from.
Notice how I didn't include 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later. Both films I like very much but, to me, they are NOT zombie films. They are post-apocolyptic infection films but they are NOT zombie films. People get infected while living, the dead don't rise from their graves and the infected don't die before they come back with the 'rage' contamination.
I mention this because World War Z is NOT a zombie film (in my mind). NOT AT ALL

It is basically the story of a world wide violent rage/rabies infection seen through the eyes of one perpetually stoned, lank haired, hipster scarf wearing, former UN investigator played by Brad Pitt.
I am not sure I have ever seen a film with such massive, global set pieces that is so utterly bland and underwhelming. This is not to say it's an altogether BAD film because it's not but it's not anything special either. It lacks a sense of humour, a sense of style, a decent soundtrack, engaging characters or any cool at all.

Since zombie films and zombie film remakes became tediously the rage in the last 10 years the genre has distinctly lacked any cool. The zombie films of the seventies and eighties are still popular today because they had iconic soundtracks, great lines spoken by characters you liked, disliked or had a complex series of mixed emotions about, they had metaphor and meaning, style and substance and fantastic gore.
World War Z really doesn't have any of that. What it does have is a global scale, some nice tension at the beginning, a cameo from David Morse that could've gone on MUCH longer and some weak underlying message about how we should all just get along. It feels more like a bland alien invasion movie.

Brad Pitt is hideously miscast, misdressed and woefully haired. He was about as convincing a UN investigator as Denise Richards was a nuclear physicist (in The World Is Not Enough). He was also bland as a beige pair of slacks on a wax model of a local news anchor from Des Moines.

To improve this film you should've cast a ton of people and instead of just following 1 man, who seemingly doesn't eat or sleep for a week as he travels from South Korea to Wales and everywhere in between, you follow lots of people around the world all detailing the outbreak in their own way. That at least would allow for some characters. Say what you like about mindless tat like Independence Day or 2012 but at least they have a sense of humour and are fantastically entertaining.

The film attempts to seriously portray what it would be like if an infection took over the human race and turned us into canabalistic rage monkeys. It also attempts to have a story that wraps up in a predictable 'satisfying' way, some set pieces on a grand scale that you haven't seen before and some wishy-washy guff about how we should work together and, in that regard, it's a complete success.
The CGI is not terrible or annoying, it is shot and edited competently and at least the first act attempts some tension and the last act attempts to be a bit more exciting. It does have one scene though that proves that, even in the midst of apocalypses, mobile phones are fucking annoying.

It thinks it's way smarter and better than it is when really it's all just too serious and a bit dull. It's, also, weirdly, one of the most bloodless films of its kind in existence (obviously to capitalise on the recent zombie craze and pack em in at all ages!).

If you're still curious then it is worth one watch and maybe I am just jaded and burnt out but I was watching the film thinking, if this had anyone else in the lead and a Goblin soundtrack this would already be 10 times better.

5 out of 10 bloodless dry steaks in a beige sack

Oblivion Review

A 70s style, thoughtfully paced and beautiful looking attempt at straight sci-fi that starts off intriguing and descends into an action fueled string of seen-it-all-before sci-fi cliche twists.

The just second time director (also creator of the graphic novel on which this is based) has vision by the bucket load but no sense of timing within the story telling and can't really mount an exciting action sequence.

Loved the design, though and Tom cruise's performance was tremendous. It's crazy that I like him more and more as an actor but with this, Jack Reacher and the Mission Impossible films he's proving himself to really just be a watchable, enjoyable and, in this, a damn fine actor. Having seemingly dropped the annoying, chest thumping earnestness that plagued his younger, dramatic roles. In this he is just the right level of wistful, cheeky and action man so as to be intriguing and an engaging protagonist for us to be stuck with for 2hrs plus. Good thing too as the entire film hangs on his diminutive shoulders. Also a good thing that his space suit mirrors those collarless leather jackets his prizes above all others.

I didn't much care for the English redheaded actress in the film, Andrea Riseborough. She seemed too young, too serious, too annoying and just not well matched to the subject matter or her leading man. True her part doesn't really give her much to do and yes a certain reveal in the film later explains away some of her characters inability to embrace Cruise's character's romance with Earth but even so, while it's clear she is a talented actress, her performance grated with me and felt out of place.
The rest of the performers in the film were satisfactory considering the one note parts they had been handed out. Morgan Freeman has a cool "Oh look it's Morgan Freeman" entrance that they sadly ruined in the trailer but apart from that his purpose is to be the kindly, wise but strong African American sci-fi character cut from much of the same cloth as Lawrence Fishburne in The Matrix.

Overall the film is literally every science fiction film ever made rolled into one but with a great design and enough new for you not to mind what it's got in common with previous films such as 2001, Moon and even Independence Day.

In a film that needed to balance lofty ideas, a few twists, an epic sense of romance and explosive action I am not sure it 100% succeeded and the score, sadly, doesn't help this by being flat and instantly forgettable but for a second time director, if you like proper Sci-Fi and want to see a riveting Cruise performance, well you can't go wrong.

A flat 7 out of 10 cool 70s looking airline lunch.

Parker and Let's Get Serious About Statham

So Parker opens tonight properly in the US and, for some fans, there is much riding on it because of their love of the books and this being the first, all-important, time that a film-maker is using the character's real name.
The character has been portrayed many times on screen, most famously by Lee Marvin in Point Blank.
If I am honest I can't speak to their fandom or concerns as I have never read the books, I am, however, a fan of Point Blank and Mel Gibson's now, sadly, overlooked film Payback.
When it comes to Taylor Hackford's new take on the character though, I am there for one reason and one reason only and that is Jason Statham. I couldn't exactly or rightly pinpoint when exactly it was I became proudly gaytham for Statham (as my buddy Moe would say) but The Mechanic being a surprisingly good remake and the 1-2-3-4 mega punch of The Expendables, Killer Elite, Safe and The Expendables 2 certainly cemented me as a life long fan.

We'll get onto The Stath in a minute though, let's just quickly give Parker the once over. I will try, where I can, to not spoil anything.

As I did last week for The Last Stand, I caught the 10pm Thursday preview screening of Parker last night in a cinema with the wife, one other couple and a solitary man. A big turn out it was not, sadly.
The film tells the tale of a principled, pleasant enough thief who is double-crossed, left for dead and, of course, given no choice but to wreak long bloody but highly principled revenge.
I will say, up front, that this is not classic Statham. It falls into the not-as-good-as-Safe-but-better-than-Blitz territory, possibly a good double bill with the slightly similar themed Bank Job maybe.
What problems the film has, though, must be planted firmly at the feet of the director, Taylor Hackford and Jennifer Lopez. Parker walks a slightly similar path to Lopez's most successful screen outing, Out of Sight but where her character in that film shines with strength, sizzling sex appeal and satisfying sarcasm, in Parker, while she's putting the effort in, the part doesn't give her much to work with. Also, at a certain point, her character makes one of those decisions that film-characters do in order to heighten a tense scene and that grated ever so slightly with me.
The same can be said for the direction, where Out of Sight employed Soderbergh's usual bag of stylistic and artistic tricks to keep the slower parts of that film visually rich, Parker falters a little and can be just plain bland when it's concerned with character and plot rather than indulging in pleasing bouts of over-the-top, gory ultra-violence. It really needed to be Soderberghed up or to be made more gritty like a Get Carter, sadly, the cinematography at least, winds up being a little on the beige side.
That's about all in terms of niggles though.
Statham is as assured as ever and even a sequence which I was sure was going to be blatantly laughable, when the notoriously-not-very-good-at-accents Stath has to imitate a Texan, turned out to be fine and did the job well. The action is phenomenally well performed and there's lots of claret splashing all over the place, way more than I expected in fact.

To be fair to this film though, much like The Last Stand before it and I suspect Bullet To The Head (coming next week), it has been marketed all wrong. A better campaign would've linked it to slower paced yet strongly violent 70s fare. I know the books are set in the past and Statham's wish was to do it, like Killer Elite and The Bank Job, in the correct period but there wasn't any support for that from the producers. Instead I feel that, while the setting maybe contemporary, they have tried to imbue the film with the colder, slightly grittier feel of a 70s film. It isn't entirely succesful as I have said, it needed more interesting direction and a funky soundtrack but on a second or third viewing I definitely see this growing on me.

Unlike The Last Stand I am not sure this is necessarily going to please hardcore action fans, as there are long sections where nary a nose is broken or a knee dislocated with the butt of a shotgun, and I can't imagine it's the Parker film all the fans of the novels have been waiting for either but for us Stathamites it's a chance to once again bask in the bullet headed Brit's brilliant screen presence as he defies expectations again and tries something a little different.

While James Bond may have run 50 years, having a muscle bound English action hero is something of an extreme rarity. Yes there was Gary Daniels before him and Scott Adkins fast on his heals but both seem to stay firmly in the realms of the straight-to-video world, at least for now. I am not sure I could think of another Englishman who has achieved what Statham has and I am genuinely surprised how often that goes un-noticed on both sides of the pond. Also I am genuinely surprised how often our beloved Stath is dismissed as being one note, always making the same film, not being a good actor or only doing films in which he takes off his shirt.
It's perfectly true to say that Statham makes films within similar genres and it would also be true to say that he is aware that there are certain things expected of him when he makes a film: shirts off for the ladies, a fight scene for the lads and a couple of cheesy one liners but there is definitely more to the cult of Stath than this paltry check list of genre cliches.
Some may have wondered, back in 2010 when they went to see The Expendables, who is this gruff voiced, cockney Bruce Willis sitting next to Stallone in the cockpit of this plane? and others may have wondered that with talent and bigger names like Lundgren, Li and Rourke in the film, what was Jason Statham, a relative young upstart, doing playing Sylvester Stallone's right hand man? but when you examine what Statham has done with his career it doesn't remain a mystery very long.
It also shows that Stallone is an astute observer of talent and the industry as well as a consummate professional film-maker of the highest order.
First of all, due to his love of Bruce Lee and Stallone movies, Jason Statham was dedicated to doing things, as much as he could, for real. He trained and studied martial arts and in his Transporter and Crank series he does almost every single physical stunt seen on screen.
Secondly, much like Stallone and Willis, while aware of his little niche in the industry or 'pigeon hole' if you like, he has tried, wherever possible to make different and interesting choices.
Sometimes the impetus behind the decisions maybe obvious things like working with first time, maverick, guerilla style film-makers on the Crank series or starring in a period heist flick written by two veteran British comedy TV writers and sometimes his reasoning for taking a project might be subtle to the outsider but, gathering what I can from interviews, Statham carefully picks his film roles based on either cast members, director, script or the chance to do something he's not done before.
Now before you say 'wait a minute, isn't that what everyone does? why is that special?' think about how easy it would be for Statham to currently be making The Transporter 7 right now, or Crank 5 or think about how instead of doing a straight to DVD 80s style action film we've seen a million times he chose to take a true-ish spy story with ambiguous characters and make a big-ish budget action film set in drab early 80s Britain with Robert DeNiro and Clive Owen.
I don't care what you say that shows someone who is striving to make things as interesting and as different as possible.

The other thing to note is that what is also rare these days and wonderful to see, is how the industry has allowed him to do it. His box office has not always been strong and yet he continues to get so much funding for different projects that the man can remain as prolific, hard working and challenged as he wants to. Yeah there might be misses, for some audiences the majority of his stuff might not interest them in the slightest but at least he is being given the opportunity to chase a variety of projects because from that model you always get a few cast iron classics. Safe showed him to have some surprising depth in his performance and like Stallone had his Rambo breakdown in First Blood, Rocky's simple but earnest underdog character and his fantastic nuanced performance in Copland, so too will Statham get his chance. I hope.

So while Parker had bits I loved and bits I didn't, it defied my expectations again by simply not being just-another-action-film (not that it would've been bad if it was either) but having a script just as interested with characters and plot as it was with blood spewing fight scenes. It's just a shame it didn't have a director good enough to 100% pull it off.

3.5 out of 5

The Last Stand and 2013 A YEAR OF ACTION!

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS NO SPOILERS
As well as writing this blog and presenting The After Movie Diner Podcast I also co-host a weekly film commentary comedy show called Dr.Action and the Kick Ass Kid (I'm the kid) and we normally watch and gently, with love, poke fun at an 80s or 90s action classic.
For me, 2012 was a year of making GREAT new friends and learning more about action films. It was a rich wonderful time. Now, 2013, is about kicking back and watching the stars of those movies, post Expendables, come back to the big screen and excite us all over again. I have done my homework and I am ready to be entertained.

Dr.Action and I have said it time and again recently, 2013 is going to be the year of action and if The Last Stand is anything to go by it is going to be one hell of a ride.

Yes Stallone was back with Rocky 6, Rambo 4 and The Expendables 1 & 2 but in 2013 we get to see him in his first film, by himself, with no previous franchise and no band of super famous friends to back him up, since 2002's lackluster effort, Avenging Angelo. This new film is A Bullet To The Head and it's directed by 80s Action maestro Walter Hill (and there was much rejoicing). As if this wasn't enough we're going to get The Tomb with him and Schwarzenegger somewhere at the beginning of autumn.

The second Planet Hollywood partner, Bruce Willis, who, to be fair, never really went anywhere has GI Joe: Retaliation, the surprisingly entertaining looking RED 2 and, of course, the Valentine's Day return of his most famous creation, John McClane in A Good Day To Die Hard all coming out in 2013!

No-Longer an up and comer to the genre but, after the 1-2 kick of Killer Elite and Safe a bona fide action superstar, Jason Statham is back in 2013 with a vengeance and not 1 but 3 movies! Starting with the insanely silly, fun looking Parker in January and continuing later in the year with the intriguing sounding Homefront, written by none other than Sylvester Stallone.

Which left only Arnie who, after his stint as the Governator, had a grand old time recently parodying himself, to great effect, in The Expendables franchise. Not to be outdone, however, he wasted no time getting back into his fighting trousers with the spectacularly strong looking schedule of The Last Stand, The Tomb with Stallone and Ten. If that doesn't convince you that the Austrian oak ain't going nowhere then let future fair like Unknown Soldier, Captive, Triplets and even the rumour of a Terminator 5 movie convince you.

After The Last Stand however, which I had the pleasure of seeing tonight, January 17th, you won't need anymore convincing. Arnie is well and truly back and I say that without any joke intended. I say it with a passionate fist pump to the air, a hearty, happy chuckle in my gut and my action gland well and truly throbbing with adrenaline. I write this an hour after leaving the cinema and I am still vibrating with the sheer happiness a man gets from watching great action.
The Last Stand IS Arnie's movie. He is absolutely superb and tremendous in the film and with no hint of ironic detachment (because I am not 15 or a hipster dick-bag) his acting is genuinely great, affecting and endlessly watchable. Whenever he is on screen the film is a delight.
That's not to say that when he isn't on screen, during the slightly long and maybe a little slow opening exposition that the film isn't watchable, it's fine but when he appears he knocks it out of the park and into another park 100 miles away where it explodes into a thousand pieces of sheer awesome.

As for the rest of it, well the script, story and direction are all pedestrian enough. It's a perfectly serviceable, if little lazily written and not overly-directed, simple plot with the whole set up being a pleasingly typical, mediocre 80s and even 60s Western throw-back.
Where it succeeds though is that it plays it out as an actual proper film.
Let me explain that.
What I mean is, in The Last Stand, Arnie is playing Sheriff Ray Owens, he's not playing Arnie. Yes there are little mentions of his age etc. and yes he has wacky sidekicks and the odd one liner but the film is a proper action film, with all the humour and exaggeration that implies but without any knowing winks to camera.
In The Expendables films Arnie can get away with playing Arnie and throwing catchphrases and knowing one liners all over the place because part of the joy of those films is seeing one movie contain all of those massive stars having tremendous fun. That stuff belongs in those movies but The Last Stand, to be successful and to put Arnie back on the map where he belongs, as an iconic movie star, it HAD to be played straight. I couldn't be happier typing this to you all now reporting that it IS played straight and is all the better for it.

The violence and action is pleasingly, properly R Rated and bloody. You get car chases, gun play, a fist fight, running, jumping and crashing through windows. Basically everything you want or need from a Schwarzenegger film.
The sidekicks are fine too and the success of the film is through very little character beats you genuinely care about this small border town and its misfit inhabitants. Johnny Knoxville as the town kook isn't too annoying at all and in fact doesn't have anywhere near the screen-time the posters and promotional material would suggest and Luis Guzman is as reliable and fun to watch as ever.
Peter Stormare, as usual, has a tremendous time chewing up the scenery around him like vast gobs of ham and then spitting it out all over the place.

It's interesting as they have surrounded Arnie with some other thick accented fellows, maybe as a way to take some of the attention off his but also, as the head villain is a Mexican heading to the border there are little comments on immigration in the film and that's sort of nice too.

Oh and the women in it are all smoking hot, which is always a BIG plus.

Yes the beginning was on the verge of being too slow and heavy handed, yes Forrest Whitaker is phoning this one in from 1999 and no the plot or the direction didn't exactly blow my mind but it didn't matter because after a little while I was watching the musclebound Austrian dispatching bad guys with a sawn-off shotgun and a ready quip and all was right with the world again.

In the lead up to this film the marketing team seemed to believe that Johnny Knoxville was also a big name and after an initial solo Arnie poster, the rest of the marketing seemed to also hover around Knoxville. This was either because the marketing people believed there was some rich, lucrative vein of as-yet-untapped Knoxville fans hiding out there (probably walloping themselves in the balls with a toaster or whatever) OR there was a slight worry that Arnie, post government and sex-scandal couldn't open a movie anymore. 

Well I, for one, hope this movie opens BIG because it seriously deserves to. 

How a marketing team can seemingly doubt a man whose whole life has been spent living up to a last name that's so huge it needs two cinema marquees just to contain it and a name so iconic it even appears on my computer's built in spell check is beyond me but then I learnt along time ago that nothing those idiots in marketing do is surprising anymore.

Go see The Last Stand and tell Hollywood you want MORE!

8 out of 10 for the film

15 out of 10 for Arnie!

Christmas Cinema Viewing - Pulpy Thrillers and Pointless Bum Nummers

The wife and I like to, over the Christmas period, visit the movie theatre and check out all the new films pushing and fighting their way into the multi-screen havens of stale popcorn, rancid piss smells and cough created germs at the hope of the almighty seasonal dollar.
This year was no exception.
Saturday December 22nd we strolled in and watched new Tom Cruise vehicle, Jack Reacher.

Now, firstly, a couple of things: I have never read a Jack Reacher book and I was only excited to see this film, initially for 2 reasons
1) Action Cruise tends to be good Cruise and
2) Werner herzog as a Bond style villain with a comically milky eye.
Apart from those things I had fairly low expectations and they were further lowered when I was set upon on Twitter and told that it was a load of old rubbish and I should avoid it.

Well I'll tell you the problem with Jack Reacher the movie and no, Lee Child purists, it has nothing to do with Tom Cruise's height you bunch of negative whiny bitches. The problem with Jack Reacher the movie was the marketing. As always marketing companies (who should really change their name to mismarketing companies or talentless hacks, they can take their pick) have fouled this up and advertised it as a relatively dumb action film. This is to do the film a disservice as it has a clever witty script, it trundles along at a decent pace, the performances are excellent and it's a good old fashioned pulpy, unpretentious, wise-crakin', ass-whuppin' good time of a conspiracy thriller.
It has a twisty-turny-yet-fairly-obvious-if-you-know-how-these-things-go type story to tell and it gets in and out with no fuss. The action is good, clear, tight and to the point too with a great finale that manages to amuse, thrill and surprise in a satisfying way.
In the shadow of the events recently in Connecticut it's a little tricky in parts because it does fall squarely on the side of the right wing where guns are concerned but, to be fair, that is hardwired into its western style, dime novel sensibility.
Lastly the casting of Werner Herzog is a stroke of sheer genius, every word he utters (and that's not a lot as he doesn't have nearly enough scenes) is the sort of nonsensical yet deep sounding babble that drips from the Bavarian's lips as easy as if he were reading a shopping list. It's an absolute wonder to behold and, actually, a little went a long way where he was concerned, any more and it would've veered into really questionable and confusing Bond style villain antics and that would've derailed the simplicity and succinctness with which Christopher McQuarrie told the story.
The wife and I thoroughly enjoyed this, sorry if you didn't that is a real shame because this movie is fun, aware of its cliches but written well enough to not over play them.
8 out of 10

Next up was This is 40 on Dec 24th

which really needed to be renamed 'Man these attractive white folk who are their own worst enemy really do whine ALOT!'

Ok, let's get started. I have a love hate relationship with Judd Apatow. I love that he has made possible some really great comedy films and that without him comedy in the last 10 years might have been just whatever Tyler Perry finds funny this week but I hate Judd Apatow because of his clear belief that, in his own directed films at least, that he is some Woody Allen like exposer of deep truths and a witty commentator on the silly little flaws of human nature. I also hate him because he seems to think showing naked bits of people that are usually, thankfully covered up is somehow hilarious and daring... oh and he produces that shitfest of incessantly pointless whiny drivel and mind numbingly shallow pile of arse 'Girls'... oh and he puts his famous musician friends in movies... oh and he needs someone to tell him to fucking stop once in a while.
Lets make something clear, hardly any film needs to be over 2hrs long and certainly not a comedy. OK. There are only a handful of stories in the world and the art form of film used to have a 90min standard because it worked. If you can't tell your story in a three act structure over the course of 90 minutes then you really shouldn't be working in film. You want to ramble? write a book, do a podcast anything but make a movie, let alone a comedy movie that is LITERALLY ABOUT NOTHING.
Are there exceptions to the 90min rule? sure - plenty.
Is there wiggle room where a movie at 105mins or even 120mins can be good or better? of course
Can you name a time you laughed for longer than 90mins? Probably not very frequently and certainly not at this Crate & Barrel catalogue looking mound of beige whining arse.
In fact John Cleese, the far too psychologically minded member of Monty Python, once said that, on average, people can laugh happily for around 40 minutes and after that there better be some plot, action or emotion going on to maintain momentum into the third act. The easiest example of this is Four Weddings and a Funeral because you laugh at the first three weddings, then there's the quiet bit where you are a little sad at the funeral, then end strong with a big, funny ending that ties all the story-lines together.
The trouble with 'This Is 40' is actually not that it isn't funny, it's actually, in places, very funny and when it comes to actual funny lines it is funnier than Apatow's previous effort 'Funny People' but the problem is it's not about anything.
The movie starts and two very annoying, idiotic, pretty people who live in a wonderful home, spend money like it's going out of style and with two daughters who are far cleverer and less annoying than them, have two Dads both of whom fucked up their first marriage and are now living with second families with varying degrees of success. When the movie ends this is all still true, except that Leslie Mann's Dad, played by John Lithgow, is a little more sympathetic and that's it. Nothing is learnt, nothing has changed and no one has said to these two whiny, whingey, stupid people "Shut the fuck up and sort yourselves out!"
The performances are fine too, although Leslie Mann, because of her high pitched nasaly voice, gets to points in this film where I could've quite easily beaten her to death with a shovel but all round there's nothing really bad about the way it's acted or shot.
It's just we're talking about a film where two people, because of their woeful communication, utter inability to manage their money and staggering lack of personal awareness and insight decide that selling their beautiful home is the solution to their problems rather than, I don't know, not spending $12,000 on flying a band no one has ever heard of ever to play in a tiny bar, not spending $10,000 on a catered Birthday party and suing the pilled-up, drippy girl who just robbed them of another $10,000.
I don't care about any of the people in this film and if the ending was that they were all mowed down by a hail of machine gun bullets from the arseholes of 8ft robot destroyers it wouldn't have bothered me in the slightest and, at least, it would've been an ending.
4 out of 10

Lastly, Django Unchained on Dec 25th

I don't even know where to begin with this. Well, firstly, unlike this film, I'll just give you a quick bit of back story. I used to like Tarantino. My patience wained with him, however, somewhere around the middle of Kill Bill 2 and after the howling and irritating mistakes of Death Proof and the masturbatory Inglorious Basterds I was about ready to give up.
Then came Django Unchained. I have seen the original, Franco Nero starring, film which is an ambiguous, rambling, strange, pulp, cult spaghetti western and like it, for what it is.
So, there, a few sentences and you understand where I am coming from and can probably see I didn't enter the screening tonight with anything more than a glimmer of hope.
Well after what felt like 5hrs but was really, a still ludicrous, 2hrs 45mins later I left the cinema utterly frustrated because while half of me wants to scream, shout, break things and write Tarantino off completely as a tired, old, unoriginal, repetitive, long winded, self congratulatory, masturbatory hack, the other half of me found a lot to enjoy in this saga of a film.
Whichever way you slice it though, it's TOO DAMN LONG. It's not one film, it's about eight and like all of Tarantino's stuff it's ever so pleased with itself and the way it sounds. For the first 3 films Christoph Waltz wanders around with a case of, sometimes amusing but mostly incessant, verbal diarrhea and in the second 5 films he is joined in his eloquent verbiage by Leonardo DiCaprio. They both swan about spewing out endless dialogue for ages and ages and ages.
Then, after all the talk, there's lots of shooting and blood letting, just like there was at the end of the previous 7 films that make up Django Unchained and also at the end of Inglorious Basterds because, in the absence of plot or momentum, violence will do.
I felt like I was actually living the year that this film takes place in, every single day of it, every moment.
I firmly believe that Tarantino is so surrounded by sycophantic dribbling nerds in his infamous screening room in LA that no one has the balls to read one of his scripts and say to him "MAKE IT SHORTER" and no the answer, in this case, just like it wasn't for Kill Bill and isn't for the Hobbit, is not to make this two films, three films, eight films, whatever. It's to have an editor or a script doctor go over his work and tear vast useless chunks out of it and then say "there... go make that movie"
So enthralled is he with his own repetitive, obvious and not-as-clever-as-it-thinks-it-is dialogue that he believes every word must be left in, clearly! because, if not, explain to me how a fairly run of the mill rescue and revenge film takes almost 3hrs to finish.
Ok, so enough about the bloated running time, what about the whole 'making Django African American' thing, well considering the time period this film is set in (2 years before the civil war) it's an absolutely brilliant idea if he hadn't already done the same thing with the far superior Jackie Brown. Also, before everyone goes and gets confused, thinking that Django somehow has some big important statement to make about racism, slavery, hatred etc. it doesn't.
Honestly, it really doesn't.
I don't know about you but I didn't need 2hrs 45mins of N words and racist violence from Quentin Tarantino to know that slavery was wrong and despicable. Ok?
This is how the conversation went at Tarantino towers:
"The original Django is set just after the civil war and this is going to be a prequel. Well, you know how I like black people and am best friends with Samuel L Jackson? how about Django is black and we set it before the civil war... am I a genius or what"
That's it people, seriously.
If the film was more serious then I would completely take your point but, and I hate to sound like Spike Lee because he's an over reactionary idiot who needs to get over himself, sitting watching the film is a bit like watching a white guy relish getting away with a ton of harsh racist slurs and referencing things like Mandingo fighting while patting himself on that back for being oh-so-clever.
And on that subject, Tarantino, just because you know one German opera does not make you a cultural scholar, ok?! especially when you have so little faith in your own audiences intelligence that you spell out EXACTLY your incredibly obvious plot references.
Lastly, and then I'll get on to some good stuff about the film, Tarantino needs to pick: either you're making an exploitation film or you are making an epic western with a serious message. Never before have a mix of genres and styles from someone who is supposedly a master at it, been so all over the place.
Man it was a frustrating vast chunk of my time I will never get back.

On the good side the acting is showboaty but entertaining, the script has some genuinely funny and exciting moments and the direction, when he can be bothered, is decent. His use of titling and soundtrack however, is, by now, completely tedious and irritating.
The exploitation elements are fantastic, the gore is excessive, the gun play enjoyable and the odd comic asides, like a scene where early Klan members dispute their poorly made eyeholes in their hoods, are genuinely surprising and funny but would be perfect if included in an exploitation film length film.
Despite the length there was enough going on to keep me watching but it felt like plowing through a miniseries on a Sunday afternoon rather than watching a film. The cinematography was pleasing and there was some interesting use of the camera but if I am honest, I am struggling to come up with lots of really positive things about it.
We all know that Tarantino rips off other films but when he starts ripping himself off (the exploitation violence and Tarantino cameo of Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, the African American switch from Jackie Brown, the epic length and revenge plot from Kill Bill, the shoot everything ending from Inglorious Basterds - shall I go on) it's maybe time someone call him on his bullshit.

All I can say is, despite how this review sounds, I didn't hate it and the things that are wrong with it come completely from Tarantino (and others) believing that his shit doesn't stink. There is a GREAT film in there screaming, kicking, clawing and endlessly nattering trying to get out but until he either gets an editor or someone cuts him down a peg or two, he's not going to make one again it seems.
As to whether I will ever watch another QT film in the cinema (I have seen every single one since Pulp Fiction) well when the next one comes out, if it's below 2hrs long then I'll think about it.
5 out of 10

The Bourne Legacy - 10th August 2012

MINOR SPOILERS

First off there's nothing really wrong with this film. It's fine. It goes from A to B understandably,  you know who everyone is and what they're doing, it takes places in locations and situations you'd expect and it climaxes with a genuinely exciting stretch of chase based action.

If you're looking for a serviceable action thriller that doesn't exactly manage to reach the heights of former Bourne movies but doesn't exactly embarrass itself either then read no further, go, enjoy and come home content. 

The cast are watchable and the direction and cinematography assured and, when given the chance by the surroundings, genuinely stunning.

Nothing overly bothersome at all.

The trouble is, nothing really exciting, tense or original either. If you've seen a Bond film, a Bourne film, a Mission Impossible film or hell, even the Tom Cruise, Cameron Diaz starring Knight and Day (which also features a bike chase sequence on a red bike with our hero in sunglasses and a leather jacket) then you've seen this film. 

It doesn't really start and it doesn't really finish, it just is. If you've seen the trailer then you know the plot and if you've seen films like this before you know the outcome. That's not to say it's bad, it's not, I am just not sure what the point of it was except, of course, to allow the studio to just continue making more of these.

One of the problems for me was the pacing. It spends a lot longer setting up the premise and characters than it needs to, repeating and slotting in bits of information that we already knew from the last two Bourne films and while it's done very well, it also feels a lot like the studio saying to someone somewhere 'We have to make this a film anyone can see, even if they haven't seen the first three films' and despite the lengthy feeling set up, it just isn't. Without the previous two films, at least, this film doesn't really work. It could've worked as a stand alone, it actually didn't need to be a part of the Bourne series at all and that might have actually served the story better but that's another discussion.

Now I sat through all the exposition expecting maybe a twist I didn't see coming or a plot strand I wasn't expecting but after 2hrs plus of this movie and nothing deviating from it's directive of 'there be big nasty government types who screwed up and so are now hunting down genetically modified super human Jeremy Renner and his pretty, scientist, would-be girlfriend' I was a little nonplussed as to how it took the film-makers so long to get to the actual 'chase' part of the film when clearly that's what it is: a CHASE film.

It's a bit like The Fugitive only you don't root for the hero because he's been wrongfully accused, has to, while on the run, find out who the actual killer is etc. because, you know, that's a plot. In The Bourne Legacy you root for your hero because it's Jeremy Renner, he's all kick ass, the pretty science lady likes him and because governments are evil, right?

Which is fine but A) seen it all before and B) see point A

The words of Matt Damon and Paul Grengrass calling the fourth part 'The Bourne Redundancy' now keep echoing around in my head.

Ok so to individual aspects of the film itself. 

Like I said, it's well shot and especially the opening scenes in the Alaskan wilderness and the last few shots of the film look amazing. 

We see, at one point, a stunningly beautiful, old house in the woods that is apparently being renovated by Rachel Weisz and yet looks like a house in the latest edition of 'You'll Never Be Able To Afford To Live Like This' monthly. 

It is captured on film well and much like a hero cop in an 80s buddy action film who shows up with a suspiciously pristine vintage car, we know that sucker isn't making it to the last reel in one piece.

Despite all that, everything else in this film takes place in tiny rooms and merely has the illusion of a Bond style, globe-trotting adventure. On the government side it's all oak paneled offices at the beginning before transitioning into secret, bluey green tech rooms filled with screens covered with every bit of information they could ever possibly need, which is all delivered to those screens in a split second by the kind of powerful speedy computer you could only ever dream of. On the Bourne side it's little crappy bedrooms, factory basements, an airplane toilet or a Holiday Inn, not the stuff visual cinema is made of.

Lastly on the directing side my only other point would be that when the action does kick in it is handled ok and in certain parts they remember to keep the camera far enough away that I know what's happening but yes, in an attempt to ape the more capable Paul Greengrass, it suffers from Chris Nolan levels of shaky, I don't know who hit who and how (even though it's on a 40 foot cinema screen), close up camera work which actually feels badly done and a bit old. This may have something to do with the fact that, for the most part, they have Aaron Cross (who's NOT Bourne right?) doing everything in very close, narrow quarters but it's also just annoying especially as, just occasionally, you get a glimpse through the swishes and blurs that something actually cool is going on.

Sorry Jeremy you did all that training etc. for nothing

As for the acting, for the most part it's great. 

Jeremy Renner is, as always, watchable, although it was the TV series The Unusuals (criminally only got one season) that really endeared me to him and not his series of fairly bland film roles.

I personally felt Rachel Weisz wasn't spectacular and her American accent wavered all over the place in scenes with long passages of dialogue, but she is pretty though and believable, just, as a scientist.

Ed Norton is Ed Norton and I can't decide whether that's ok yet or not, as an actor he confuses me. I can tell you that their attempts to make him look older and more like someone who would work for the government is a tad laughable and a big grey kids wig would've looked better but, for the most part, he plays the 'villain' well but despite some scenes designed to hammer home the point, you never really get the feeling of ambiguity about all our protagonists that I think the director was going for. 

No one is really a hero and no one is really a villain, which would've been a great story to tell but alas, this is an 'action' thriller and so we need a long pointless chase sequence where we see Renner and Weisz escape America through and then watch the Government figure out EXACTLY how they did it despite that being what the audience just saw, just a few seconds ago! and why do we get that scene? So that the film can happily jump the genetically altered shark in its third act.

All that said, I will re-itterate, the film is fine, enjoyable and even exciting in places, I am just not sure there is any point to any of it but I am sure you could say that about most films... I never will but I am sure you could say that.

6.5 out of 10 predictable sandwiches (because there's nothing else in the fridge)

The Diner and The Basement JOIN UP for the FIRST time!

Large eared regular listeners and visitors are hopefully aware that, for at least, 2/3rds of the Diner's existence as a podcast we have carried the 2nd Unit Podcast Network logo and every show you hear a list of fantastic shows that we are so very honoured to walk side by side with.

Well one of the very best shows around is We Came From The Basement featuring the ever jovial film and music aficionados Jason and Shawn.

There was much talk about getting the 2nd Unit guys together to do round-table shows or cross-over shows and while we have all, at one time or another, appeared in some capacity on each other's shows this will be the first time where to get the FULL EXPERIENCE of the conversation you will have to listen to BOTH shows.

Yes on August 20th in the Diner - http://amdpodcast.blogspot.com
and on August 25th in the Basement - We Came From The Basement
Jason, Shawn and Myself will unite in a podcasting frenzy of awesome to provide you with, what I hope is just the first,
Cliff-Hanger Podcast Cross Over Extravaganza!
We will be discussing 2 1970s Peter Fonda starring Road Movie type films!
First up is:

Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry

A rip roaring yet existential cops and robbers chase flick chock full of awesome lines, hair-raising stunts and groovy hair!












and then we've got...
Race With The Devil

Where Fonda (again), Warren Oates & Loretta Swit go up against Texan Devil worshippers in a road chase for their sanity and ultimately their lives!

Exciting, nerve wracking and fun!










YOU WON'T WANT TO MISS THIS!
Both shows will be posted at: www.aftermoviediner.com and http://amdpodcast.blogspot.com