I didn't have a very good 'Vantage Point'

Dennis Quaid has always been an actor I’ve admired. His emotion is right their in his face – in the jagged contours of rugged skin and eyes that can look straight through you. Since he lost the pretty-boy shine of his 1979 underappreciated classic Breaking Away, and a little later the rightly unappreciated Jaws 3, he’s been one of Hollywood’s most dependable assets. However, often the films themselves haven’t stood up to his understated stature. Indeed, if it wasn’t for his output in 2000 (Steven Soderbergh’s Traffic and Gregory Hoblit’s Back To The Future-like Frequency) many wouldn’t even know who he is. It’s a shame then, given high expectations from an energetic trailer and promise shown previously by director Pete Travis, that Vantage Point has to shelved under Patriotic Pap with all the other vacuous Hollywood actioners of the past few years. (Read more...)

I'll have your Bacon for Garters...James Wan's mediocre Death Sentence

It you want to see a movie that so perfectly encapsulates deux ex machina look no further than James Wan’s Death Sentence. It’s an unoriginal piece of filmmaking that hinges on one of the biggest horror clichés in the book. It’s a shame because director Wan definitely has an eye for action and suspense. Indeed, Death Sentence (about a man driven to revenge after his son is murdered and his family terrorised by a urban gang) might be messy but it’s taut and intriguing when Wan concentrates on his action sequences. It isn’t surprising since this is the writer-director who brought us the brilliant Saw. What is rather discouraging is the fact his blood-splattered revenge movie lacks Saw’s unique ability to stay one step ahead of the discerning horror fan and viewer. The grander scale of Death Sentence seems to limit the effectiveness of Wan’s directorial capabilities proving that bigger budgets and bigger stars hinder the talents of those once forced to utilize the ‘reigned-in’ limitations of low-budget independent cinema. When Wan attempts to be subtle in Death Sentence we find the film digress to colourless melodrama and soap-opera styling. (Read FULL REVIEW)

Dennis Dugan finally makes a good movie...praise the Almighty!

I’ve been very critical of director Dennis Dugan over the last few years. Who could blame me? He gave the world the awful Saving Silverman and followed it up with the spiteful racial slurs of National Security (a film that embodied bad taste). So, with trepidation I began to watch his 2006 film The Benchwarmers with little in the way of expectation. What I learned was with a good script and some energetic performances, Dugan can turn out a decent movie. In fact, this is the best film he’s made since Happy Gilmore. (Read FULL REVIEW)

Interesting but ineffective Woody Allen

I’d liken it to 2004’s Closer - both in terms of the London locale and themes of infatuation and obsession – but, just like Mike Nichol’s film, we’re provided characters so distasteful and self-absorbed it becomes difficult to sympathise with them. While Match Point throws its audience for a loop in the last twenty minutes, the second half of the film feels like a different movie. The first half is much too slowly paced (Allen’s English dialogue having its basis on stereotype doesn’t help), and while it comes together more in the final twenty minutes, you’re desperately trying to remember what happened in the hour you subconsciously switched off. The ending also feels contrived and it’s sudden jump in pace is distracting in comparison with the laboured, pedestrian first act. (Read FULL REVIEW)

Who the hell directed Poltergeist?!

The issue of who actually made the 1982 classic horror film Poltergeist has raged ever since an article appeared in the L.A. Times questioning who was directing the movie. On the day of the newspaper’s on-set visit Steven Spielberg was directing some on-location shots with Hooper no where to be seen. (Read On...)

Future Shorts

I remember Dawn Simpson telling me today’s audience were into ‘snacking’ when I interviewed her about the Propeller short film channel. It’s very true as there’d be no audience for You Tube if it wasn’t. We want our media delivered to us at any time, during any situation, and on whatever medium suits the moment. Short film has prospered over the past few years because it’s finally found a commercial audience who can invest five minutes of free time, not in the morning Metro while on the bus, but on film, television clips, and podcasts. They can do it because the technology makes it easier than reading a paper. Just as You Tube couldn’t work without snacking, the IPhone and Ipod wouldn’t without this new phenomenon either.

For me, short film is a fabulous form of cinema because it allows new filmmakers to hone their craft, and an audience to see film with all the frailties and raw beauty that cinema used to possess. Recently, I’ve been very impressed with the output of British-based Future Shorts (www.futureshorts.com). Unlike Propeller or Ronke, you don’t need Sky to see their films as they’re available via My Space (http://www.myspace.com/futureshorts) and their You Tube channel (www.youtube.com/futureshorts).

My favourite at the moment is Oedipus (Click Here) by self-acclaimed makers of ‘stupid comedy’ Rong, a UK-based group of cinema fanatics who won the BBC new filmmakers award in 2005. The warped but genuinely amusing tale begins with the title-card ‘The following featurette should not be viewed by anyone who has, or has had, a mother and/or father’. It proceeds to fit a left-of-centre modern day tale of masturbation into the ageless, but equally warped, psychology of Freud’s Oedipus complex. The film, made in 2004, features an rhyming narration that works particularly well, but it’s the perfect pace of the film that really sets it apart. It may be raw but Oedipus examples the virtues of short film with enthusiasm and obvious skill.

Certainly, for a more accomplished and less risqué piece of cinema look no further than Japanese film Right Place (Click Here). This comedy-drama looks at a Tokyo worker’s obsession with neatness and perfection. It features some stunning cinematography that perfectly encapsulates what the film tries to portray. The rigid, static camera shots and balanced frame set the film’s tone, a correctness that has to be maintained. Indeed, Right Place is cinematic art at its most inspiring, with superb use of sound and lighting, and a rhythmic flow to the editing.

Other very worthy films to look for are the brilliant animations from Yev Yilmaz (check out Procrastination: Click Here), Gokhan Okur’s Last Train Ride (Click Here), and the multi award-winning Heap Of Trouble (Click Here). Also, check out Pierre Olivier’s beautiful Can We Kiss (Click Here), a film set in a French café about a girl who wants to practice her audition lines with a complete stranger.

I wish the new Star Wars movies were made 20 years ago....

My problem with the new Star Wars films stems from one important fact: George Lucas is now more concerned with making fan fiction than constructing the fundamentals of plot, character, and dialogue. For me, Attack Of The Clones, like Phantom Menace and Revenge Of The Sith, seem like Lucas giving screen time to characters the fans want to see - R2-D2's battle with molten lava, C-3PO's out-of-body adventure, Boba Fett's back-story (let's not forget how Boba Fett dies!) rather than celebrating the whole saga and making something worthy of beginning the series. These new films look more like cartoons, the stories are far too complicated, and the actors don't have the skill to turn Lucas' stale dialogue into authentic expression. Yes, there are some good moments - all action orientated - but Lucas should have sought the help of Lawrence Kasdan when writing the screenplays and he should have handed the directorial duties to more skilled filmmakers. Lucas is a brilliant fantasist who creates wonderful worlds and adventure stories, but he has no restraint, and that's the most damning thing about Star Wars Episode 1, 2, and 3.