Captain America: The First Avenger There’s a few things one has to ignore in order to enjoy this film. Firstly, there’s the fact that it’s utterly ludicrous, kitsch and silly. Secondly, there’s the rather jingoistic feeling which essentially writes out all countries other than the US and Germany from their roles in the Second World War. Still, if a comic book adaptation feels like it has the outlook and depth of a 1940s comic book, who am I to complain? The 1940s setting of the film really works well. And the technology of Hydra, which is actually in advance of our own, but done in a way that feels fitting in the era is enjoyable. The script is silly, and the plot entirely predictable, but the acting is good enough (especially Hugo Weaving as Red Skull and Tommy Lee Jones as Colonel Chester Phillips) to pull you through the worst of the idiocy, and the end result is surprisingly watchable. Captain America: The First Avenger on IMDB Captain America: The First Avenger on Amazon

Captain America: The First Avenger

There’s a few things one has to ignore in order to enjoy this film. Firstly, there’s the fact that it’s utterly ludicrous, kitsch and silly. Secondly, there’s the rather jingoistic feeling which essentially writes out all countries other than the US and Germany from their roles in the Second World War. Still, if a comic book adaptation feels like it has the outlook and depth of a 1940s comic book, who am I to complain?

The 1940s setting of the film really works well. And the technology of Hydra, which is actually in advance of our own, but done in a way that feels fitting in the era is enjoyable. The script is silly, and the plot entirely predictable, but the acting is good enough (especially Hugo Weaving as Red Skull and Tommy Lee Jones as Colonel Chester Phillips) to pull you through the worst of the idiocy, and the end result is surprisingly watchable.

Captain America: The First Avenger on IMDB

Captain America: The First Avenger on Amazon

Thor Firstly, let me start with a complaint that is not unique to this film. I’m sick to death with films that have the dialogue absurdly low in the mix, and the action turned right up to 11. It means you have to watch the whole film with a finger on the volume control if you don’t wish either to miss out on the plot, or have your neighbours banging on the door asking if they should be evacuating the flat due to some terrible structural deficiency. Thor itself is an entirely unremarkable film. It’s competently put together, and watchable enough, but I’m not sure I can give you any reason why it would be worth your time. It has the plot, dialogue and level of special effects of any of the more recent superhero movies. It has entirely two-dimensional characters with whom it’s hard to make any emotional connection and the action scenes (annoyingly noisy as they are) are all banging, crashing and CG with no style. That’s not to say that there’s anything particularly bad about this film, Natalie Portman, Chris Hemsworth and Stellan Skarsgård put in perfectly good performances within the script they’ve been given and Kenneth Branagh shows that he can direct an average superhero movie as well as he can direct Shakespeare. It’s just that there are a million movies in the world, and the chances are you’ve seen this one already, probably many, many times.

Thor

Firstly, let me start with a complaint that is not unique to this film. I’m sick to death with films that have the dialogue absurdly low in the mix, and the action turned right up to 11. It means you have to watch the whole film with a finger on the volume control if you don’t wish either to miss out on the plot, or have your neighbours banging on the door asking if they should be evacuating the flat due to some terrible structural deficiency.

Thor itself is an entirely unremarkable film. It’s competently put together, and watchable enough, but I’m not sure I can give you any reason why it would be worth your time. It has the plot, dialogue and level of special effects of any of the more recent superhero movies. It has entirely two-dimensional characters with whom it’s hard to make any emotional connection and the action scenes (annoyingly noisy as they are) are all banging, crashing and CG with no style.

That’s not to say that there’s anything particularly bad about this film, Natalie Portman, Chris Hemsworth and Stellan Skarsgård put in perfectly good performances within the script they’ve been given and Kenneth Branagh shows that he can direct an average superhero movie as well as he can direct Shakespeare. It’s just that there are a million movies in the world, and the chances are you’ve seen this one already, probably many, many times.

Hugo Magic Shop On Flickr, Alex Eyler (Profound Whatever) is back and has created another beautiful Lego scene, this time of the station magic shop in Martin Scorsese’s Hugo. (via)

Hugo Magic Shop

On Flickr, Alex Eyler (Profound Whatever) is back and has created another beautiful Lego scene, this time of the station magic shop in Martin Scorsese’s Hugo. (via)

Source: Flickr / hoyvinmayvin
Senna I’d heard a lot of good things about this documentary when it was released a couple of years ago. Since then it’s won a couple of Baftas, and even people who didn’t like F1 recommended it. And it is good. It’s a well-made documentary, and Senna is an engaging personality. Clearly it ends rather emotionally (I know almost nothing about F1, and even I knew what the ending of this film was going to be) and all of this is done tastefully and very intelligently. However, and this is no fault of the film makers, I just didn’t find it particularly interesting. However well made it was, however interesting a character Senna was, however expertly the story was told, none of it really managed to get me over the fact that I find F1 about as interesting as watching people pile up heaps of cash, and then measuring how their heaps of cash compare to each other, size-wise. If you find F1 even marginally more interesting than me, I’d be inclined to recommend you watch it. Senna on Amazon

Senna

I’d heard a lot of good things about this documentary when it was released a couple of years ago. Since then it’s won a couple of Baftas, and even people who didn’t like F1 recommended it.

And it is good. It’s a well-made documentary, and Senna is an engaging personality. Clearly it ends rather emotionally (I know almost nothing about F1, and even I knew what the ending of this film was going to be) and all of this is done tastefully and very intelligently.

However, and this is no fault of the film makers, I just didn’t find it particularly interesting. However well made it was, however interesting a character Senna was, however expertly the story was told, none of it really managed to get me over the fact that I find F1 about as interesting as watching people pile up heaps of cash, and then measuring how their heaps of cash compare to each other, size-wise.

If you find F1 even marginally more interesting than me, I’d be inclined to recommend you watch it.

Senna on Amazon

Love and Other Drugs Watching this film, it seems like a piece by a first-time director. Perhaps one that’s been brought on board at the last minute when some not very well-known, and second-rate director left the project acrimoniously. In fact it’s directed by Edward Zwick, who’s actually directed some half-decent films, not least Blood Diamond, which felt like a much more substantial and intelligent piece. To say that Love and Other Drugs is a truly bad film, though, would be taking it too far. It’s just unremarkable. It’s a film populated by clichés with a plot and script that feels like it’s been copied and pasted from a few other films. A bit of Up In The Air here, a bit of Pretty Woman there, a touch of No Strings Attached around the place, and the end result feels like watching a film that you’ve seen before, and didn’t particularly like the first time. Love and Other Drugs on Amazon

Love and Other Drugs

Watching this film, it seems like a piece by a first-time director. Perhaps one that’s been brought on board at the last minute when some not very well-known, and second-rate director left the project acrimoniously. In fact it’s directed by Edward Zwick, who’s actually directed some half-decent films, not least Blood Diamond, which felt like a much more substantial and intelligent piece.

To say that Love and Other Drugs is a truly bad film, though, would be taking it too far. It’s just unremarkable. It’s a film populated by clichés with a plot and script that feels like it’s been copied and pasted from a few other films. A bit of Up In The Air here, a bit of Pretty Woman there, a touch of No Strings Attached around the place, and the end result feels like watching a film that you’ve seen before, and didn’t particularly like the first time.

Love and Other Drugs on Amazon

Christopher Hitchens on Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11

“To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of “dissenting” bravery.”

Black Swan Trailer 

Looks pretty good, and Vincent Cassel’s generally great, even in films that aren’t so great.