Film Reviews - AvPGalaxy's Own Critics!

[Hubbs]

Guns, Girls and Gambling (2012)

First thing that hit me here...this is a rip off of '3000 Miles to Graceland' surely, it even stars Christian Slater who does yet more Elvis mincing. On top of that guess what...its another crime heist, but this leans more towards the comedic side admittedly.

Ah Mr Tarantino you have a lot to answer for, so many films now use your jumbled up crime plot route its ridiculous, and here we go again. A group of Elvis impersonators are after a native Indian relic, so are some crooked cops, a cowboy hitman, a female assassin and a crime kingpin called 'The Rancher'. They all think Slater has it but he doesn't, no one knows who has it and naturally they're all trying to kill each other left right n centre.

This film follows the trail of so many other heist films these days. It starts off randomly with sub plots and main plots that link into each other later. Characters are introduced like a videogame with their names popping up on screen alongside hokey graphics which looks so tacky now. All the characters are cliched unoriginal and mundane...'The Rancher' who looks like 'Boss Hog', 'The Cowboy' 'The Chief' 'The Indian' 'The Blonde' all speak for themselves really, oh geez!. Then of course you have the four Elvis impersonators, an Asian, a black midget, a homosexual and Gary Oldman who clearly can't do Elvis impressions.

The film pretty much consists of all these characters running around shooting at each other and beating up Slater. The comedy attempts to be quirky and witty with freeze frame moments, flashbacks, bits of dialog on screen and a lot of silly hammy action and one liners. I must admit some of the gun action is quite good, there is some blood and gore at times which does make the film feel better than it should...or more exciting anyway. Had this been a PG-13 it would have been pretty tiresome, just like the Red franchise. Obviously they included a hot blonde female assassin in a figure hugging black catsuit to attract more viewers...OK OK it worked.

As with a lot of these straight to DVD crime heist flicks its an ensemble cast which is impressive, clearly everyone thought they might be in the next big crime comedy. Powers Boothe, Oldman, Jeff Fahey, Chris Kattan (where has he been?!), Tony Cox and Slater, OK so a few big names and a few B-movie stars. And if you haven't already guessed, as with many of these types of films, there are plenty of twists and turns as the ending looms. I would say its keeps you on your toes but you know damn well there will be twists, its so predictable, you know the main bad guys and the main good guys will have plot twists.

We've seen all this stuff before time and time again, Hollywood is running out of plot ideas quicker than you can say Hollywood is running out of plot ideas. The only thing here which is remotely interesting are the Elvis impersonators, but even that has been done before in '3000 Miles to Graceland' and much better. There definitely needed to be more of Kattan as 'gay Elvis'.

4/10

[Hubbs]

The Adventures of Pluto Nash (2002)

Being one of the worse box office bombs ever isn't a good start really is it. Yet to look at the trailer, the sci-fi fantasy aspect and the films title you could be fooled into thinking this might not be too bad. The title is pretty sweet if you ask me, definitely an 80's movie title right there.

The plot is set in 2080 and mainly on the moon which is now called Little America. A location where gambling, girls, criminals and all things seedy are rampant, a bit like Las Vegas in the old days. Eddie Murphy is a retired smuggler who runs a nightclub on the moon and wants a quiet life, but this is all messed up when some goons come along and force Murphy out by destroying his club under the orders of a mysterious kingpin. Its now up to 'Pluto Nash' to find out why, who is the man behind it all and try to get his club back, or what's left of it.

I think the first issue with the film are the visuals. The film is oldish but not that old and unfortunately the CGI effects are pretty poor. Shots of the moon, moving vehicles, the lunar surface and of course Little America just look average and obviously CGI. When we close in on the urban areas the sets aren't too bad in design but again its terribly obvious its all sets. It all looks like a very mediocre attempt at a 'Blade Runner-esque' grimy neon lit urban district. The colour palette doesn't really help with everything being grey and boring, yes I know its the moon and the moon is typically grey but come on. There were some nice 50's-esque designs on some buildings and vehicles though, there was that element throughout the film but it still felt drab and lifeless, virtually black and white.

Then you have all the interior sets, design and costumes...its all grey!! everything is grey! flippin' eck!. Not only that but the interior designs look so dated, like its all been reused from a 60's TV sci-fi show. I understand that doesn't necessarily make it bad, there are plenty of examples where films have deliberately gone down the homage route or retro design/vibe which can work wonders giving a great charm factor. The problem here is the film had a massive budget and you wonder what they actually used it on.

Take the robot character played by Quaid (and the maid robot character). What they have done is simply apply a lot of makeup to Quaid to give him a doll-like appearance, then he merely acts out the robot role. Now again this can be done and it can work but probably best in low budget films that have little choice. In a big production it just tends to feel lackluster, the maid robot was the same but dressed up in a sexy French number as if that makes it more acceptable. I did quite like the 50's sci-fi sense I got from Quaid's robot though, like a butch Robbie the Robot in human form...kinda hehe.

Whilst watching I also found the plot to be a tad confusing really, or at least it didn't make much sense because it was all a muddle of grey. There are a lot of character names flying about here, a lot of seemingly pointless stuff, aimless boring dialog and not much action believe it or not. We just move from one cheap looking grey set to the next with little to laugh, disappointing seeing as its supposedly a Murphy sci-fi action romp.

But is it? you think it is but its not really, its more like a 1950's nightclub murder noir homage, 'Harlem Nights' in space perhaps. I must admit to thinking of 'Total Recall' at times whilst watching, it has that kind of vibe going on, minus all the excellent action and blood of course. Do I get the feeling this was made and acted the way it was on purpose?...was it?! I'm not sure, I'd like to think that but deep down I really doubt it. I just think it was a poorly executed movie which had potential to become a bit of a classic. I can see why people might enjoy bits of it like Quaid's cheesy robotic performance and the minor visual gags dotted throughout, but end of the day this really feels like its trying to achieve what 'The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai' achieved.

I'm still not really sure whether or not this film was intentionally made like a low budget sci-fi B-movie for artistic reasons, or it just came out that way. The more I think about it, this might have worked much better as a short TV series, it certainly has the look and feel.

4.5/10

[Hubbs]

Pirates (FRA/TN 1986)

Back before Johnny Depp revolutionised the pirate movie with his camp ways there were the odd rum fuelled flicks such as this. Roman Polanski doing what he does best which is creating lavish productions that tend to not be overly successful at first but gain cult status.

The story is naturally a typically salty one involving Walter Matthau's 'Captain Red' and his young French sidekick trying to pinch a golden throne from some fancy pant Spaniards. At the same time there is of course a love interest for the young dashing French sailor, mutinies, plenty of galleon boarding from both sides and lots of skullduggery on land and at sea.

I think this film is very similar to 'The Fearless Vampire Killers' in the fact that its actually kinda dull but looks beautiful. All the pirates, especially Matthau, look as they should do, covered in dirty rag-like attire, greasy facial hair, deep tans, golden teeth...every bit the stereotypical swashbuckling sea dog. I was quite intrigued with the wooden leg Matthau's Captain has, it really looks like he has a real wooden peg leg! and this is before CGI folks, impressed. On the flip side the Spanish look perfectly rich, aristocratic, pompous, snooty and dignified in their very impressive duds. The wigs sell the whole look if you ask me, really authentic looking.

I was also very impressed with Matthau's cockney English accent. He genuinely does a sterling job with it and comes across not American that's for sure. At the same time Damien Thomas as the preening perfume smelling 'Don Alfonso' is by far the stand out performance. You can truly see the disgust and contempt in his face for the wretched pirate scum, I really enjoyed his peacock-like display of regal superiority.

All the characters and extras look great and are accompanied by some luscious tropical locations and some nice olde worlde period ports (real locations). Did I mention the ship yet? no? well lemme tell you, it looks awesome. Fully realised to scale with a working motor so it can sail, completely detailed from top to bottom with everything you'd expect to see on a 17th Century Spanish vessel.

Yep its all visually stunning with good performances but unfortunately that's about it. There is very little of interest going on plot wise, the film is way too long and there isn't that much swashbuckling going on surprisingly. This isn't a silly fantasy flick nor is it a historically accurate flick, but it does bring a more down to earth approach to the genre. There isn't much flamboyant heroics here ladies and gentlemen, more like backstabbing with every man for himself, more genuine. No way is it as bad as suggested and I'm not sure why it didn't do better at the cinema, its a solid romp. Think along the lines of Richard Lester's Three Musketeer movies but with less comedy.

6/10

[Hubbs]

Ali G Indahouse (2002)

Well alongside his fame and fortune Sacha Baron Cohen has also managed to achieve such a high level of notoriety with his urban character, that the actual town of Staines changed its name to Staines-upon-Thames to get away from the negativity. That's pretty impressive Mr Cohen, you made an English town change its historic name, is that funny?.

Like many TV characters that have reached the big screen this whole thing feels padded out, forced and struggling for material. Unfortunately this is no different despite being a brilliant and popular creation by Cohen. I think it was a bad choice to go down the actual movie with a plot route as we all know this character like all of Cohen's characters works better when lampooning reality. Seeing the highly naive and thick Ali G trying to strike a conversation with a real politician about current affairs only for him to lower the tone and go off on completely random filthy tangent is what its all about. Hearing Ali comment on his bitch 'Julie' or his various friends from Staines and the things they get up too is amusing to listen too, but to actually now see these people spoils the myth as it were.

Of course the biggest draw with Ali G is the highly accurate satirical mocking of young British teens (black and white) who imitate the American rapper gang culture. This is the crux of his laughs, his not so secret weapon, talking with this modern day slang cum multicultural cockney hip-hop dialect that is frankly cringeworthy to listen too when anyone speaks with it, especially white folk. Add to that his heavily Jamaican/Afro American/UK chav influenced streetwise attire with bling, tracksuits and big trainers and you have a great controversial character ready for upset public figures.

Thing is all of this is completely lost in the film because there is none of that, its just a silly bland plot about Ali trying to save a community centre in Staines. There are no funny clever stinging moments because its a scripted movie, instead they must rely on childish toilet humour which only works part of the time, its immediately unoriginal and loses all credibility. Coupled with the fact the cast is made up of big names merely sinks this project even further, big names equals no risks, no proper laughs, no awkwardness or embarrassing moments, its all played safe which is not what Cohen and his creations are about.

Now I would be lying if I said there were no funny moments in this film, there aren't many but they are there. For me personally the best and most recognisable lampooning of my home country would be at the start of the film when Ali is 'street racing' in his hyper modded Renault down the high street. This very short sequence is extremely amusing because of the stringent UK road laws and the fact we have to drive at 20-30mph everywhere. Watching these two uber modded cars crawl down the high street at 30...pulling up sharply at the 20mph speed board is hilarious, literately the best bit in the film.

Its actually reasonably funny during the start of the film whilst Ali is within his home territory of Staines and his mates. After that as we follow him to Westminster it just loses any fresh comedy hopes and becomes so derivative, the character of Ali G does grow somewhat but only in the wrong way. Instead of the chavy boorish dunderhead we all know and love we end up with some Americanised superfly looking pimp that just feels too much of a stretch even for this character. We all know about the typical UK traits that Ali G represents, we all roll our eyes at the image he portrays because we all see it in our daily lives, that's why its so funny. If you take that away and go down another countries cultural route then your target audience won't relate to it anymore, simple as that.

In the end this film has just gone too far over the top with the character and its just not funny. Had it been a mockumentary style flick like 'Borat' then it would have worked I'm sure, but this option doesn't. Its basically puerile with dated stupid visuals gags and must resort to showing Charles Dance in drag to try and raise a laugh, and it fails at that. Such a huge huge error for the direction of this film that has resulted in a very very average outcome.

4/10

[KirklandSignature]

Captain America: The Winter Soldier




Overall Grade: B+


One of the best and more thought out stories so far in the MCU. Apart from some overly ridiculous "action moments", this is the most grounded and realistic MCU film; even more so than the Iron Man movies. Unlike others here, I thought the "Winter Soldier" subtitle is worthy. Each appearance of the brainwashed baddie comes with absolute destruction and precision. I felt he was given adequate screen time though some may find that viewing the first one is required since a lot of this film builds off that and is somewhat more of a continuation of Steve's adjusting to the modern world.

[Hubbs]

Necessary Roughness (1991)

So...is this an episode of Quantum Leap following the constant adventures of 'Sam Beckett'?. No?! well it sure as hell seems like it as the ever cuddly Scott Bakula portrays the same character he's always ever portrayed with the exact same haircut too...geez dude!. So lets not beat around the bush here, this is the late in the day 'Major League' clone that shamelessly rips every cliched idea from that film whilst attempting to look all innocent by turning it into a college football flick.

The plot is different of course, but end of the day it still involves a coach and his assistant trying to muster together a half decent team which ultimately ends up being a bunch of misfits, freaks, girls and Scott Bakula. From there on we get all the regular sports cliches and predictable fluff such as the team losing all the time, losing faith in their coach, a soppy romance, a rival team of assholes, the resurgence of the team and one man behind the scenes taking joy in the teams failure and trying to amplify it.

I think the problem with this film other than the fact its a lame clone, is they simply haven't created any fun characters to follow or care about. As I've already said Bakula plays the same character he always does, then you have a bloke who thinks he's a samurai warrior, the nerdy guy with specs, a huge Samoan guy, an Aussie?! (why would an Aussie be there?), a black guy who can't catch, a ex-military obsessed bloke, a female kicker and finally the hilarious comedian Sinbad...add sarcastic quips here. There are of course other faceless jock meathead players also.

Hell to even make sure they copied every single aspect of 'Major League' they even have a light-hearted announcer for the games...and its Rob Schneider! oh the quality. I really shouldn't keep going on about the similarities but its impossible not too! just look at the films poster, its identical in every way! unbelievable!.

The only big change in this film is the team doesn't actually win any league or championship in the end, they lose a load, tie a game and their final game of the season they manage to beat the top team but that's it. They presumably still end up near the bottom of their group or league, so we don't get the obligatory montage of wins when they turn their game around. What we do get is a sickly bit of crap when their coach goes into hospital of a suspected heart attack just in time for the final big game against the top team. We then get a vomit inducing scene where second in command Loggia tells the team to go and win it for the coach, possibly his last wish on Earth. Personally I thought this was all a set up to get the team to play well, or at least Loggia's character was exaggerating the illness and the coaches last words on purpose. Nope it was all for real, the illness isn't as bad as suspected, but the shitty cliched corny attempt at a rousing emotional scene was indeed for real.

This really is a prime example of an early 90's straight to the videoshop piece of turd trying to leech off the success of another earlier franchise. There are literately no redeeming features anywhere I can think of, its not funny, its not cheeky or rude as suggested by the poster, you have no interest in any characters, even the game sequences aren't very good or exciting...its just poorly made trash that didn't need to be made.

2/10

[BANE]

You are one prolific movie watcher Hubbs.

[Hubbs]

Kick-Ass (2010)

The world of the visually violent comicbook movie probably first kicked off with 'Blade' way back in 1998 (honourable mention to the 1989 Punisher), although this film wasn't really ultra violent and filled with profanity. After that along came 'Watchmen' which offered a very realistic take on the superhero genre and was pretty gritty. Since then there hasn't really been that much until this graphic novel adaptation popped up with huge amounts of real violence and bucket loads of naughty words. It was like 'Robocop' for the comicbook genre.

The actual plot isn't any different from your average superhero flick. Its basically an origins tale showing how a young 'Peter Parker-like' teen gets to grips with his life and sets out to become a superhero after making his own suit. There is no emotional death of guardians to push our hero along here admittedly, this guy just wants to fight crime but ends up getting in way too deep.

The angle for this creation is the fact its set within the real world where people do get hurt and superheroes don't actually have super powers. Its a concept that may feel totally milked these days but back in 2010 it wasn't...that much. The character of 'Kick-Ass' is just a young male teen in a scuba suit with modifications and a couple batons, when he starts out he gets stabbed and beaten almost getting himself killed. The characters he meets up with later in the form of 'Big Daddy' and 'Hit-Girl' are also merely regular people but with good fighting and weapon skills. The bad guys they fight are normal everyday thugs, pimps, drug dealers, robbers and mobsters, its simply the real world.

This is why the film is such a breathe of fresh air (for the time) and so intense. When we see fights going down we know its all for real and the heroes can't rely on any super powers or super weapons, anything could happen technically. Sequences such as...Hit-Girl kills a whole bunch of black drug dealer dudes with many amputations, Kick-Asses initial bloody brawls, when Big Daddy and Kick-Ass get captured and are beaten with bats and of course the excellent adrenaline rush when Big Daddy takes down mob boss 'Frank D'Amico's' warehouse of goons, are all brilliantly directed and visually slick but red raw with bone cracking realism.

There are of course your typical superhero-esque visuals at times, some over the top martial arts and the odd moment that will challenge your suspension of disbelief. I guess that is bound to happen in most flicks of this nature just to add that tiny bit of fun fantasy, but in general this film is down to earth, seedy and gritty as hell. Despite the fact most of the characters are just kids, the film certainly isn't for kids with limbs and bullets flying, blood spurting everywhere, Hit-Girl swearing like there is no tomorrow and some nut crunching beat downs. The scene where Big Daddy is killed is especially dark and quite harrowing really, its shocking at first.

Most of the characters aren't anything too special really. The stand outs obviously being Johnson as Kick-Ass who crosses between the obligatory comicbook character geek and a reasonably tough superhero (at times) really well. Moretz grabs your attention merely down to her age truth be told where as her character feels more like a lethal Christmas elf. But its clearly Cage as Big Daddy who wins the day for me, that brilliant Adam West sounding voice and 'Batman-esque' outfit, quite amusing. I would like to see a film centred around his character.

I must also quickly mention that this entire idea may well have been pinched from the 1999 goofy superhero comedy spoof 'Mystery Men'. That film is all about a team of superhero wannabes that don't actually have any super powers but must somehow defeat a supervillain who also has no real super powers. The film is set within a realistic universe that visually copies and slightly mocks Gotham City but no one in that world actually has any super powers. So 'Kick-Ass' follows suit but goes down the violent route with dark comedy.

Its a controversial movie for sure, what with the very young Moretz playing the loose lipped Hit-Girl and dressing in that slightly disturbing school girl outfit near the end. Oh and the fact she goes around slicing and dicing bad guys willy-nilly accompanied by a weird light-hearted music track at one point. Add to that a film that portrays all these youngsters getting involved in such brutal violence yet the film almost makes it look like fun n games in silly outfits. It did raise eyebrows when it came out and honesty I can see why, but personally I think these are the things that make the film stand out giving it some epic originality.

I loved how they stuck to the source material (relatively), I loved seeing Kick-Ass starting out and getting his head kicked in, seeing him slowly get somewhere even though he isn't actually any good then being stupid enough to create his own Myspace. The film really does the origins thing well and makes you invested in the hero, you find yourself really wanting him to succeed and at the same time seeing how risky this field of work would be in reality (in case you ever thought about being a hero). The only thing that let it down for me was the very ending where things got a bit too superhero-ish and comicbook-like losing the dark realism. Easily one of the best graphic novel/comicbook adaptations and it wasn't watered down, they kept it as it should be.

8/10

[Hubbs]

Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey (1991)

I do believe I saw this film at the cinema having no clue what it was about, I merely loved the visuals the trailer threw at you. Much like the original film I again watched this over and over during my youth and loved the adventure. You can clearly see from the first scene this film has totally gone down the colourful comicbook visual route but at the same time has opted for a slightly darker approach. The first film was fun for all ages but this time the bogus journey is aimed more for teens methinks.

This film is truly manic and a full on rollercoaster of thrills and spills. I do love the design and style of many aspects we see, the futuristic neon outfits at the start are a nice look. And despite the cliched idea I did like how the bad guys are all in black when everyone else is in heavenly white, the black costumes against the neon and white looks quite striking actually.

Its gotta be the imagination that earns the kudos mainly, even though much of the film is messy and too convoluted for its own good the variety of creations is a joy to watch. I really enjoyed the hijinx the pair get up to once they are killed by the evil robots, the evil robots themselves are seemingly a cheap get out of jail free card for less work by using Reeves and Winter in duo roles, but the small special effects we see when they remove their skin is fudging awesome. I really dug those transparent robotic exoskeletons we briefly see, they were really well done and always reminded me of those old transparent Competition Pro joysticks.

I think the epitome of this film and franchise is the sequence where the dead duo possess Ted's policeman dad and his Sgt. The whole effect is a seriously cheesy and now dated CGI visual trick that back in the day looked really sweet. From there on we get a fantastic little performance from Hal Landon and Roy Brocksmith as they take on the stoned surfer personalities of Bill and Ted.

From this point on the film becomes a surreal voyage into the afterlife with some neat visual tricks and nicely crafted ideas. Of course we all know the highlight of all this is William Sadler as Death, or the Grim Reaper. Best bit in the entire film has to be when Bill and Ted challenge him for the sake of their lives and they all end up playing board games like Twister and Cluedo. I think we all can agree seeing Death get upset and trying to cheat is fan-fudging-tastic!. it doesn't really get much better than this in all honesty, Death seems to go a bit camp as we progress and takes a back seat to the mayhem.

I must say I still don't quite get what the point of the devil scene was. The duo land on this boulder suspended in mid air by a chain, there are also many others in similar situations around them. The Devil seems to be in control of the winch that drags these boulders in towards this giant fire breathing dragon head with jaws that crush the boulders. But what's the point of all this? why is the Devil just standing there doing this? are these unfortunate souls suppose to be burnt up when dragged into this gaping fire breathing maw? and why did the Devil let the duo escape this fate by climbing off the boulder at the last minute?. The other thing that made me think was the way the duo escape their own personal hell's. Does this mean that Death is more powerful than the Devil? because he just bails them out easy peasy. Must say I did like the rubber suit and makeup used for the Devil, pretty intimidating for a young persons film.

As we near the big finale which is again another stage show setup, things get even more wacky as ideas bustle for screen time. Bill and ted make good robots of themselves helped by 'Station' who is a pair of identical genius aliens they brought back with them from the afterlife in heaven, Death also tags along. Again the hands on suit effects for these robots are really nicely done, deliberately tacky looking but well performed by whoever underneath with those robotic movements we've all seen. Station the alien fares less favourably as he looks kinda evil to me, he's pretty ugly and when he speaks his mouth doesn't really sync up at all, its a bit basic really. And why we needed that morphing of the two I don't know, very odd inclusion.

End of the day I prefer the original film over this bright hyper dream-like comicbook offering. Back in the day I would have said the opposite as I preferred this sequel back then. I guess it was all the big bold effects that won me over back then, the wow factor and being very young. Now I'm older and much much wiser (ahem) I can see that the first film has much more charm, a way better beat tapping soundtrack, its funnier with better performances and its just more enjoyable overall. This film is visually more impressive and has more action as such, but its just not as funny or as clever with its casting. Winter clearly gets better here whilst Reeves clearly gets worse...all he can do is bob his head around like a lunatic and pout from behind his curtain style locks. That selection of amusing cast members for the original really boosts that film even though its a little bit more childish.

'Bogus Journey' is bigger and bolder for sure and to that extent it gives the viewer what they paid for. In my mind they kinda sacrifice funny performances and charm for in your face effects. The effects and imagination are excellent for the time don't get me wrong, but if it wasn't for Sadler as Death this film would be sorely lacking in the character department. Its definitely a film of its time and I don't know what kids today would think of it (probably think its a Turtles rip off), but in my opinion bigger with more money doesn't always mean better.

7.5/10

[Hubbs]

Borat (2006)
(Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan)

'Yagshemash!'

The second film in the Cohen trilogy based on his original character creations that we all saw within his Ali G show. Now even though these characters are all very clever creations and work well within the BBC comedy, the films varied. Myself I always thought Ali G was his best and funniest creation offering killer satirical comedy, but the movie of that character turned out to be quite poor and not overly funny surprisingly. 'Bruno', his third film and final original character was easily the next best character offering outrageously embarrassing homosexual tomfoolery, the film also lived up to that brilliantly.

Borat has always been somewhere in the middle for me, the character never really came across that funny on the Ali G show with the small sequences, I thought it slowed the show down. Of course his character is suppose to be simple, backwards, slow, dull, dated etc...that's part of the stinging gag that Eastern Europe is slightly primitive and centuries out of date (dare I say medieval? yes I dare). But working with this angle can also be risky as the jokes can be slow coming and childishly simple, Borat himself being on the same intelligence and life experience level as a child to a degree (when outside his native country).

So it did come as a surprise when this film actually turned out to be very very good, very amusing, highly awkward to watch at times and totally beat Cohen's first foray into the movies in 'Ali G Indahouse'. The main change to the programme here is the fact the plot is strung together around individual sequences showing Cohen making an ass of himself in dreadful cringe-inducing situations. Unlike Ali G where the film was spun into a proper full blown story with actual characters that you didn't care about whilst ruining the background myth of Ali G at the same time. This film merely introduces a sidekick who directs Borat as he goes across America making a documentary for the benefit of his homeland Kazakhstan...oh and searching for Pamela Anderson.

So just like the little sketches on the Ali G show we see Borat meeting various Americans, visiting various places of interest and generally showing himself up as the innocent wet behind the ears traveller who has no clue how to conduct himself in the modern western world. This film easily tops the TV show sketches for embarrassing moments, its like a car crash...you know the rest. Some of the things we see are just unbelievable, apart from much blatant racism against Jewish folk (Cohen's favourite), we meet a racist all American cowboy at a Texas rodeo who accuses Borat of looking like a terrorist down to his moustache. More racism in the South as Borat tries his hand at etiquette lessons (again) from some clearly well to do religious white folk, the funny twist being Borat's fat black hooker girlfriend turning up at the door. Full scale nudity of course, can't not have a bit of full scale public nudity (oh geez!), breaking stuff in a Confederate heritage museum (more obvious racial undertones) and finally assaulting Pamela Anderson in a Virgin Megastore (that shows the films age!).

Being America it is too easy for Cohen, the targets are so obvious and so simple to set up...racism, all American jingoism and homophobia are always gonna be his weapons of mass embarrassment. He sets his sights on these and hits them spot on, be it an old person, a young person, a famous/political person or even a crowd, Cohen can tease xenophobia or discrimination out of anyone with his naive questions and general approach.

While the film does feel more like an extended version of the TV sketches that was to be expected. It was also expected that whatever Cohen got up to here it would be bigger and bolder than ever before, that was certainly achieved. It starts off slow and ends kinda flat but unsurprisingly those are the sequences where Borat is a character within a films plot, its only when he ventures into the reality of everyday America that the film comes alive. Unfortunately the film is riddled with offensive moments which will and have upset many people which I can understand, unlike South Park the film isn't an animated cartoon so it feels more intense.

To a degree you could say that all the commotion surrounding the film only goes to prove it did what it set out to do, Cohen hit the nail on the head. Most will know of this character and Cohen's antics from TV, you know what to expect and get what you pay for, if you don't like this guys brand of humour then you know not to see this, it will offend. Although I do wonder how some of these people carry on their regular lives after being somewhat exposed in this film, that is if they are not actors of course, its actually very hard to tell in my opinion but I'm sure some may be. After the disappointing Ali G flick Cohen pulls it back and produces a great slice of wince-inducing shameful humiliation that will leave you with a sheepish grin plastered across your red face.

'Dziekuje'

7/10

[Hubbs]

Brüno (2009)

The third and final film of Cohen's main trio of characters he created for the Ali G show on TV. After the disappointing movie of Ali G Cohen wisely opted to stick with the plot formula that he used for his second film Borat which was a success. Like Borat this film is again a series of cringe-inducing sketches/setups strung together by a flimsy plot which doesn't really matter, its all about the embarrassing sequences dotted throughout.

The story follows Brüno as he travels to America to try and become the biggest gay star or celebrity ever in any way possible. There is only one other character along for the ride and that is his assistant 'Lutz' who was created for this film. So the plot has a familiar core in that once again Cohen's absurd character is travelling to the States to basically humiliate himself in any way he can...unknowingly on purpose.

This film is exactly the same as Borat's film in structure and execution basically, both characters follow their TV roots as we see familiar setups in various locations. Brüno is mainly set in and around LA, I think, as we see him attempting to become the latest hot thing on the scene. As you would expect much of this consists of hugely embarrassing and awkward scenes where he tries to make his own chat show pilot and gets upset at the focus group reviewing it, interviewing and trying to seduce an American politician (Ron Paul) who angrily storms off after Brüno takes his pants down in front of him and a fantastically funny scene where Brüno visits a spiritualist and mimes performing oral sex on a dead gay ex-lover.

But wait there's more, Cohen takes it even further this time as his character adopts a black baby and goes on an American TV show which just happens to be full of African Americans. He then exposes parents of child models by asking what they are willing to allow their kids to do for a gig, unbelievably these parents will seemingly allow their kids to do anything as long as they get the gig! Nazi uniforms anyone?. Of course this being the wild US Cohen can't resist the old deadly trio so easily found in America...homophobia, racism and American jingoism or extreme patriotism, and Cohen goes for the throat.

Its so easy to offend someone in the US with homosexuality...especially when two half naked men are trapped together in bondage and roaming the streets. Then again going to Christian faith gay converters and trying to chat them up won't help you're case much either, neither will going on a hunt with a bunch of redneck hicks and sexually harassing them whilst flirting with one of them. The best bit has to be the cage fight match where Brüno and Lutz face off against each other but end up making out in front of an enraged southern redneck crowd! Makes you wonder how they got out of there alive.

But wait, there's even more!! not only does Cohen upset the Yanks he also flies to Jerusalem to upset his own people! The sight of all these religious folks faces as Brüno swans around in his revealing camp attire is hilarious and the moment he is chased down the road by some Hasidic Jews (or very touchy religious Jewish folk at least) is mind boggling. How much of these sketches are real is difficult to tell in all honesty, whilst in the Middle East Cohen's character supposedly upsets a Mossad agent and a Palestinian terrorist leader (asking to be kidnapped!) which you'd think could be a very dangerous thing to do in reality. So it does beg the question was it real or setup? you kinda get the impression it wasn't quite as genuine as the US based stuff.

As you all know the character of Brüno is homosexual (did you notice?) so the film heavily features a lot of homosexual jokes, visual gags and naturally the obligatory bits of nudity. Where as in some countries like the UK you could probably get away with much of this stuff as the general public would probably just laugh at it, in the US its very different and Cohen knows it. Manipulating Americans seems to be Cohen's forte and he does it so well.

I think this film is probably the best out of the three personally, its much more riskier and certainly more in your face with all the homosexual references (full on cock n balls in your face actually). Many of the sequences are very funny, very offensive, very clever and very daring...we all know Cohen has balls of steel. As with all of Cohen's work its not gonna be everyone's cup of tea that's for sure, if you didn't enjoy Borat then this isn't gonna change your mind about Cohen. The film can come across as more homophobic than anything at times, so it depends on whether people can look past that. On the other hand if you liked Borat (and to a lesser extent Ali G) then this is you're lucky day as this is bigger bolder and badder than ever before.

7.5/10

[Hubbs]

Spider-Man (2002)

Hey anybody remember those really old Sam Raimi Spider-Man films? you know there were three of them and I think they were quite popular at the time. Ah who cares now we have a much better rebooted franchise which isn't exactly the same right? errr yeah, sure.

Yep so we still have these old Raimi films, they won't vanish or anything. But before tossing these old Raimi films into the bin of film oblivion lets discuss how dated and so not cool they are now. So its film one and naturally we get the origins of Spider-Man/Parker and all the various characters around him. 'Harry Osborn' is trying to maintain his company and experiments on himself with their new performance enhancing vapour drug stuff to try and keep the important military contract which is dangling by a thread (oh and he's already building the Glider and special suit combo too for some reason). Low and behold it kinda turns him crazy as an unfortunate side effect even though it does sort of work. From there on out Osborn slowly turns into the Green Goblin and Spider-Man must defeat him whilst protecting his family and friends.

What made me giggle a bit was the fact that Parker goes to this genetics laboratory where he is shown all these genetically enhanced spiders. He of course gets bitten by one of them which has somehow escaped and it leaves a nasty little red mark. Now you'd think he would report that asap really, you've been bitten by a spider in a laboratory full of dangerous arachnids, might die here fella. Nope he goes home feeling ill, once home the bite has now swollen badly and he's feeling pretty ill it seems, time to call the hospit...nope it'll clear up.

After the discovery he can climb walls, leap around like crazy, fight etc...he then gets carried away and goes off across the rooftops like someone who wants to get spotted and exposed. Oh wait he doesn't wanna do that does he, kinda silly thing to do then really. On an honest note I did quite like the origin build up in this film I admit, its done in a nice light-hearted true comicbook fashion that is simply likeable. The effects used to show how he can see fights and things in slow motion works really well without actually having to use all that Zack '300' Snyder tomfoolery. Seeing Parker crawl up walls is an old but neat trick of the eye and its a nice touch to see him in his initial childish homemade outfit getting to grips with his skills. Not too sure how he made his proper outfit though, he just swings into one scene and its there, presumably he made it? how?? looks expensive.

Of course the effects for Parker swinging through the air are now pretty dated looking even though it doesn't seem like a really old film. The CGI is average and ranges from passable to down right awful at times, although the famous Spider-Man outfit makes it look better than it actually is. There is also some nasty use of bluescreen here and there along with some quite cringeworthy comical moments, or should that be attempts. Even the photos of Spider-Man taken by Parker for the 'Daily Bugle' look completely fake which was amusing. It is a comicbook adaptation of course so there is a very limited amount of graphic violence or blood on screen, there are some edgy bits though no doubt but overall its actually handled well and holds that balance just right, in other words this isn't an infantile flick.

The Green Goblin was a hot topic at the time due to the fact it wasn't actually the Green Goblin, it was a man in a suit. I must admit  now I think this works OK, at the time I didn't like it and I can see why as you kinda feel cheated (bit like The Mandarin in 'Iron Man 3'). But watching this now I think it was a good move to show Osborn going nuts and developing a split personality, it feels much more realistic and gives much more depth to the character...like did Osborn ever really have control? should Spider-Man tried to save him in the end? etc...The Goblin suit is a touch off visually I gotta say, I think they could of done that a bit better, used some other green tones on there, maybe make his helmet a bit more striking. It did look more like a giant plastic suit for a toy character that some poor sod would be wearing in a mall for advertising purposes, a bit hokey. On the other hand the CGI and prop work for the Glider was fine I think, looked pretty sweet.

The film ticks along just fine really and the cast are likeable fitting their roles well. Maguire is a good Peter Parker no doubt but I still have a hard time thinking he's under the Spider-Man suit, luckily we don't actually see that so it could be anyone and probably is. Dafoe is the best thing in the film by far with his scene stealing scenery chewing performance, not only that but his face is the perfect shape and structure for the Goblin too. When you see the Goblin swoop down you totally believe its Dafoe overacting all the way, I could almost say he saves the film because without a good villain this would have sunk, good CGI effects or not. I love the way he growls and cackles into the mirror with those devilish eyes of his.

The finale is daft I will say it now. How the hell does Parker/Spider-Man manage to hold onto that cable car full of kids with one arm whilst using the other arm to stay clinging to the bridge is beyond me. Its there I also realised that his spider web squirty stuff is also damn strong it seems...really damn strong! The actual final fight between the two main characters is decent enough though showing Spider-Man battered pretty good with blood!

In my personal opinion this is a better film than the recent rebooted version, its a much easier fun going Spider-Man adaptation with more comicbook-esque visuals. There are silly moments and bits that don't work sure, why on earth they stuck Macy Gray in there I don't know because that dates the film badly and her voice is annoying, there are a few Superman-esque shots where Parker rips his shirt to reveal the Spider-Man logo, Sony product placements! and 'Mary Jane' only recognises Parker as Spider-Man by his kiss?! wut?! what about his voice?! The Green Goblin's attacks are also completely inconsistent as one minute he uses bombs and vaporising bombs to kill, the next he throws some whirling blade things when he should of used the bombs that would have worked very effectively. It is certainly pretty cheesy and pantomime-like looking back but hey that's fine, I found myself enjoying this film much more than I recall back in the day and like I said I also enjoyed it much more than the reboot.

7/10

[Alien³]

You are one prolific movie watcher Hubbs.

I love that you got ignored as he was too busy watching movies haha

[Hubbs]

You are one prolific movie watcher Hubbs.

I love that you got ignored as he was too busy watching movies haha

Sorry my time be precious hehe yeah but sorry didn't mean too.




Spider-Man 2 (2004)

So after the massive success of the first film and fears about a low budget horror director taking the helm put to rest, amongst other things, we get the obligatory sequel. A second chance for another Spider-Man thriller with better effects, better sets, better costumes, better CGI...better everything, but still just a tad exactly the same as the first film.

Two years on and 'Parker' is trying to cope with his daily grind, his love for 'Mary Jane' and of course being Spidey. Ah but wait, Peter Parker let me introduce the rather stocky 'Dr. Octavius' and his obvious pending disaster he calls a self-sustaining fusion reaction. Before you can my Spidey sense is tingling it all goes tits up as the experiment goes errr...tits up! and the Doc becomes a dastardly baddie hell bent on...umm doing his experiment all over again for some reason.

Yep the introduction of Alfred Molina was yet another brilliant bit of casting as his performance as the calm methodical Doc Ock (along with his perfect build and looks) save the film from becoming rather mundane. Just like the first film the villain is the winning ticket and gives this adventure a shot in the arm which is so clearly required. Now I'm not saying this film was bad but the strangest thing...back in the day I always preferred this film over the original, but now the tables have turned and I find myself enjoying the original much more. I think the problem with this film is it really starts to lose its sense of semi realism and my suspension of disbelief goes right out the window.

Now I always though Spider-Man was merely a regular guy with extra strength, speed, endurance and jumping ability, along with the few special skills of being able to climb walls and shoot gooey web stuff. But he was still able to get hurt, cut, bleed and generally die. In this film Spider-Man is virtually invincible and practically as strong as the Hulk or Superman so it seems. I mean really...he's falling from massive heights and slamming into walls and cars, he can hold up huge metal structures, lift incredible weights and stop a runaway train with his gooey web stuff and arms! Was Spider-Man always this powerful??

There are also some really silly hokey issues dotted throughout that bugged me. Doc Ock hides out in the one and only run down shack in the middle of the harbour and it stands out like a sore thumb, no one ever thought of looking there? even when the lights were on? When Doc Ock robs the bank no one notices him just standing there right next to the vault door in his long trench coat, hat and shades looking pretty suspicious. Oh and how do you hide four giant mechanical arms under a coat? Why does the Doc go from being a decent human being into someone who would kill innocent people? even when he's got the arms fused to his spine or whatever he's still the same guy, but for some reason he suddenly decides hurting people is the way to go. Plus when the Doc goes to see 'Osborn' for the tritium why didn't he just force Osborn to hand it over instead of agreeing to get Spider-Man in exchange for it, surely that would have been easier and saved time.

How does the Doc get all that expensive equipment? I know he pinched some cash from the bank but that wouldn't cover it. Plus how was it delivered?! didn't anyone notice all this stuff being delivered to this abandoned building in the harbour where no one goes or lives? didn't anyone think it was odd or suspicious? And what on earth was his experiment about?? what was it for? what would it do? it just felt like an outrageously diabolical device just for the sake of being a diabolical device. If he managed to finish it then what? would he become a good guy again? all he wanted to do was finish the experiment so its not like he was trying to do anything bad, and the experiment was suppose to be for the good of mankind right? maybe let him do his stuff?

The special effects in the film were an improvement over the first film but again looking back they still look a bit dated. Seeing Spider-Man swing through the city (but what the hell is he attached too?? its hilarious!) is looking much better but most of the shots were we see Doc Ock walking along via his four mechanical arms are really bad at times. The entire runaway subway train sequence is really dodgy looking nowadays, the fight on top of the train and seeing the Doc throw those obviously bad CGI people from the train...blimey its bad!

So yes the action is bigger louder and more impressive than the first film but the CGI effects are way more obvious to me, far more hokey looking. Close up shots of Doc Ock and his arms are fantastic, the way the arms lift him up, the way the arms look...all brilliant, but the bad outweighs the good I'm afraid. There is so much dodgy CGI and bluescreen work in here, the sequence where Parker rescues the little girl from the burning building, rescuing 'May Parker' from the Doc halfway up a skyscraper made me cringe especially, the car being chucked through the cafe window etc...Oh and why does Parker seemingly lose his Spidey powers halfway through yet gains them back again from nowhere? what was that about?!

Surprisingly I didn't enjoy this as much as I thought I would...and I'm honesty being honest here. Molina is superb as Doc Ock and the action is deserving of kudos for the ambition, but visually it lacks quality in my opinion and there are lots more silly niggly bits that stand out to me. This sequel definitely felt more along the lines of a Schumacher Batman flick at times, its reasonable fun but the original still easily surpasses it.

6/10

[Hubbs]

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

So I think the main number one big ginormous flaw in this movie is the fact they use too many villains and plots, I'm sure we can all agree on this. Way back in 1992 a certain young Mr Tim Burton had free reign to create the sequel for his smash hit 'Batman'. In doing so he stuck in two main villains alongside his own creation...The Penguin, Catwoman and Max Shreck. This seemed to start a massive trend that has continued to this day! Following on from this initial idea many or most superhero flicks seem to have at least two villains as standard, sometimes more! and this is where this film implodes.

First villain is Venom, now this alien creature crashes to Earth in or on meteorite out of nowhere and that's it, we get nothing more on it at all. No idea where its come from, how, why, what its intentions are, why its doing what its doing etc...its just there and you gotta accept it. Whether or not the comics give us this information I don't know (although I'm sure they do), but here in this film its a solid mystery for anyone who isn't a comic fanboy, myself included. So back story and the way this character is played out in the film is new to me, I have no idea if its correct alongside the source material, all I know is how this thing looks and it did seem well created to me. The CGI was decent and seemed to capture Venom's appearance well although why it would alter Spider-Man's spider logo seems daft, it infects his outfit and body, why would it alter the logo?

Second villain was the Sandman who I know was bumped up from a minor comic position to a major role revolving around Parker's uncle. Now again whether or not this was the right way to go if you're a fanboy I don't know, as for the rest of us I felt the story arc did work pretty well and developed the Sandman into something other than just a common baddie. This character now had a good solid family arc combined with an emotional connection to Parker which did feel a little forced admittedly, like a clear after thought, but it managed to hold together. I also liked the visual design for this guy, he had a distinctly old fashioned feel about him, like a criminal from the 40's. The characters musical theme really pushed that vibe if you ask me, a very Bogart-esque tune. I liked his outfit too, again it had a very old fashioned look about it, like something Gene Kelly would wear.

The final villain squeezed into the film was 'Harry Osborn' as the next Green Goblin, following on from his fathers work. Now I had no problem with this character being here because he's been here since the beginning and it felt right that this story arc should happen. Unfortunately along with the other two villains it all felt so convoluted and tight for space that the poor old Goblin was reduced to sporadic appearances. Well they all were really, Venom especially so, that thing vanished for half the flick. The Goblin gets conveniently injured right at the start, after a horrendously bad CGI battle in the sky with Spidey, and we don't see him again for ages. Its the same spiel as before with this character, just replace Dafoe with Franco, same action sequences, new outfit that's all (looks worse too). So in that sense it seemed weak but you knew he had to be there, if anything they should of dropped Venom as that really seemed crowbarred in, jostling for any kind of screen time.

The other problem I had with this film other than the multitude of villains was the relationship between Parker and Mary Jane. Oh my balls this got annoying, first they're together, then they're not, then they get back together again, then Mary Jane sluts around with Osborn, then Parker again, plus you've got 'Gwen Stacy' in there too...holy ribbons of snot!! I got so fed up of seeing Parker and Mary Jane fighting whining and crying Jesus. Plus the fact Mary Jane gets fired from her stage show after one performance seemed a bit ridiculous and is obviously done to crank up the annoying emotional relationship issues. Then you've got all that crap where Parker goes to the dark side due to the Venom alien. Parker as a dark character apparently translates to a lame looking emo hairstyle, a bit of goth eye shadow and then acting like 'The Mask' in a nightclub, what an embarrassing mess that was!

I must admit to being disappointed with the effects this time also, is it me or do the effects actually get worse after the first film? Seeing Spidey swinging from rooftop to rooftop is still sweet, Venom was cool and the Sandman had some great effects in places but the action sequences became very hard to follow with fast moving terrible looking CGI. As I already said the initial fight between Osborn and Spidey was awful looking, but the big finale was just a shambles of shoddy CGI and greenscreen, a lot of it looked very obvious to me. Also not so sure why or how the Sandman is able to grow to such massive proportions or fly, how does sand enable that?? and he kinda looked like a big lump of poo.

I honestly think this is the most over stuffed flick I've seen for some time (or ever), it really is so overloaded and overly long. Stands to reason this effects the film negatively which is a shame seeing as this franchise hasn't been too bad. The best bit in this film for me was probably the amusing cameo from Bruce Campbell (again!) doing his best snappy snooty French maitre d'. Seems incredible to say that I know but it was a fun little scene, everything else was a mess frankly...apart from the odd visual moment.

There are huge periods where characters disappear from the film entirely so other sub plots can continue (Sandman and Venom), Osborn and Parker end up fighting over Mary Jane instead of Osborn's dead father, Osborn's butler is a horrible 'Alfred' rip off, the guy acting in the role is dreadful plus he only now in this film tells Harry about how his father was really killed!! And lastly even though the Sandman's story arc worked OK and has a good heart it did feel like they were trying to rewrite the original film. So definitely ambitious and not a total complete disaster but clearly one bad guy would have worked out better, we now all know Venom was only stuck in there to maximise the audience due to the characters popularity. I understand that but really they should have known better...well I say that but this is Hollywood,

5.5/10