The Iron lady

This was always going to be a hard film for me to judge.  Due to my dislike for the title character.

The film gives you a background to the character giving you the times she struggled due to her class and her gender.  It gives the impression of her as a feminist icon.  This I'd dispute, she fought for her rights and her career.  I can't think of an incidence of her improving conditions for her fellow women.

The period detail seems pretty good throughout the film as it progresses.  That's probably my favourite thing about the film.  Obviously I'm wrong, as everyone else loves it, but I didn't enjoy Streep's performance.  It was in the Michael Sheen, perfect mimic style.  I didn't get a sense of the woman or her feelings on anything, just that Meryl had her off to a T. The younger actress seemed to be doing more actual acting.

The film is as flimsy as it gets when it comes to a political stance.  Or even showing the consequences of her actions.  There are big events, some which would anger Sean Penn, but zero analysis.  This is a huge let down. I'd like to have seen it tackled in a similar way to McQueen's Hunger.  No sides taken but a proper look at its subject.

My biggest problem with the film was the fictional portrayal of a living woman and her 'hallucinations'.  It was a bad way to move the story along.  Put the facts on screen or tell a nice story about characters that don't exist.  Don't do half of each and portray an elderly, probably not very well, woman like this.  It leaves a very bad taste in the mouth.

All in all I liked this film a little more than I liked the woman herself.  I'd rather have watched a documentary.

1.5 pawprints out of 5

Apollo 18 (spoilers hidden)

I've been waiting to see this film for quite a while now.  It seemed designed for me.  Moon landings and aliens.  What more could you want?  I deliberately kept my knowledge of the plot as low as possible, though it seemed that the poster pretty well spelt it out.

I wasn't disappointed with the film.  It starts out looking very much like Apollo 13 in style.  There's some home video of the crew and their families.  Followed by more cinematic looking footage from NASA.  The actors are all completely new to me making it easier to sink into the telling of the story quite quickly.  The performances all held together for me.  They weren't great but good enough not to take me out of the story.

The story starts off explaining the 'found footage' with text across your screen.  Then it's all found footage throughout.  This is a good thing in my view.  The presence of 'conspiracy theorists' or deniers on screen would have weakened the viewing experience for me.  I enjoyed this film.  I haven't yet read any other reviews but I have seen some ratings.  It seems my appreciation is in the minority.  My only real bugbear which isn't huge, is in the spoilers below.

SPOILERS BELOW  rollover to view

I liked the inclusion of the dead Russian Cosmonaut and his ship.  It helped to give some warning signs to the men from the Lunar Capsule.  It also is a good explanation (in the realms of this being true) of why the Russians didn't take to the Moon after the US had abandoned their programme.  The added tension of a possible escape was used pretty well too.

It did seem blindingly obvious to me that the crew member who had stayed behind in the ship was never going to be allowed home.  The easiest solution to him ever spilling the beans seemed to be to not allow his return to Earth.  I'd already said goodbye to him before the Russian ship left the surface.

I did feel a little let down by the aliens.  However, on a low budget it was a clever idea to go small.  They stood up to on-screen scrutiny much better than something a lot bigger.  It would also explain why we hadn't noticed them before.  The idea of some of the aliens having returned to Earth on previous Apollo missions weakened it for me though.  That statement should never have been scrolled across my screen.  It would surely have occurred to the viewer anyway.

END OF SPOILERS

I thoroughly enjoyed watching this in the cinema.  I was going to give it 4 pawprints.  But, as I was writing this I started to see flaws I had ignored as I was watching.  I don't think this would stand up to repeated viewings very well.  I am glad I've seen it though and I'd mark it as a Damn Good Effort.  I definitely want to see more of Gonzalo Lopez-Gallego's work.  Mention has to be made of the miniscule budget.  I didn't feel this film looked cheap at all.  I'd lump it in with Moon.  Though not as great a film as Moon.

3.5 out of 5 pawprints

X-Men First Class - Spoiler Free

This film hadn't really crossed my radar.  Then I heard an interview with Jane Goldman.  The plot sounded interesting and I'm a sucker for origin tales.  The deal maker though was that Michael Fassbender was in it and to make things even better, so was James McAvoy.  How had the details of this film totally pass me by?

I had heard nothing but good reviews of this before I went to see it.  Both from the critics and the real people whose tastes I trust more.  Before I carry on I must inform you that I've never even been in the same room as an X-Men comic.  My only knowledge of the stories comes from the first 3 films.

This has an impressive and attractive cast.  Most of whom did themselves proud.  I have never been a Rose Byrne fan, I find her a little wooden.  She wasn't a distraction in this.  Though I would have preferred to see someone else in the role.  The film is set off to a great start by the fantastic Bill Milner.  That lad just keeps getting better and better.  He's surely destined to become one of our greats.  I did get a little thrill of pride at the strong Euro-presence on the cast.  I'm assuming this was helped by Vaughn directing.  Fassbender as usual was magnetic to the eyes, no pun intended.  That man fills a screen better than most.  McAvoy was, as uusual, a warm, nice presence on screen.  January Jones was good and looked absolutely gorgeous.  The camera loves that woman.

The youngsters recruited seemed truly out of their depth but mostly matured within the story.  Only one character I felt was a little weak with no real truth to her performance or the actions of the character.  That was Angel.  We were never told what had made the 'baddies' in the film bad.  There was no back story to the villain's henchmen and woman.  I want to know more about some of those.  I'm hoping we get a sequel to this film with some of those answers.  My main question was what made them follow the villain in the first place?  Running time certainly meant that no more could have been squeezed into this film.

There are a couple of great cameos in there.  A nice nod and a wink, without straining to fit them in.  I'm wondering if I missed some as I caught two but one was a blink and you'll miss it.  Towards the end of the film an old favourite of mine appeared as a Naval Captain, I'm sure his presence will please most people who lived through the 80's.  I guess he's kind of a cult hero now. 

I enjoy origin stories, I know that makes me weird.  This is one of the better ones I've seen.  It was certainly helped by the fantastic 60's period atmosphere set up by the sets.  The sets were beautifully stylish.  I wonder if there's a little Mad Men influencing fashions here?  The plot was the fantastical fun that you require from a comic book movie.  There were dark scenes but they were limited.

This has set the bar high for sequels.  It didn't re-write over the previous films which was a good idea.  It paid homage while setting up 30 years worth of stories to tell without damaging either.  I hope there is a sequel, as long as they keep the cast.  This film worked for me because it was well written with a fantastic cast.  The main cast members made the roles their own and I don't want to see anyone else in them.  A sequel will also have already fleshed out most of the back-stories so hopefully we can cut down the running time.  I couldn't tell you what I'd have cut from this story but 2 hours and anything past that is usually too long.  It didn't spoil the experience but I was glad when it finally ended.

4 out of 5 pawprints

Wittertainment Rules of Conduct Score 3/10  For full explanation of these click here.

No Eating - FAIL, stinking, noisy nachos

No Slurping - PASS

No Rustling - FAIL, the entire row behind has rustly sweets

No Irresponsible Parenting - FAIL, a baby that was taken in and out as it wailed, yes it's a 12A

No Hobbies - PASS

No Talking - FAIL, people like to whisper don't they.

No Mobile Phone Usage - FAIL, people must check their phone 10 minutes into the film

No Kicking of Seats - FAIL, not all the way through luckily just every now and then

No Arriving Late - FAIL, no excuse when Cineworld don't start the film until 20 minutes late anyway

No Shoe Removal - PASS

Senna

I was lucky enough to get tickets to a preview to this film a few days before it's UK release.  It was at Cornerhouse Manchester and was supposed to be followed by a Q&A with the writer and director.  Unfortunately the writer couldn't make it on the day.  The director, Asif Kapadia, was great though.

The film shows the life of Senna as an F1 driver.  This is told through film footage rather than interviews with the people who were there.  The access they gained to footage was amazing.  You get a very complete picture.  The production had pitched their idea to Senna's family and gained their support.  They had also gained the support of Bernie Ecclestone who gave them full access to the F1 footage archives.  It seems a camera is following all aspects of F1 on race weekends.  There is also footage of Senna from the family archives giving a picture of the man away from his job.

The director says that once they had permission from the family and Bernie everyone else was on board too.  There are parts of the film with voice-overs from friends, family and colleagues but the story is mostly told as it happened.

The film focuses mostly on Senna's rivalry with Prost rather than his relationships with other drivers he raced against.  This, we were told, was down to time constraints.  The first cut came in at 7 hours long!  The complicated relationship with Prost is more than enough to fill one film.  We're also shown glimpses of his relationship with Jean-Marie Balestre.

The one reason you must see this film in a cinema is the in-car footage.  It's the first time I've ever had any idea what it must be like to travel like that.  It's exciting, awe-inspiring and gave me renewed respect for the skills of these men.

This is a definitely not just a film for F1 fans.  This is a well presented biography of a charismatic genius who happened to be a racing driver.  F1 fans must see this in a cinema or forever kick themselves.  Anyone who enjoys a good, moving, story should see it too.

I had always thought of Senna as a brilliant but arrogant driver.  This film made me think much more fondly of him.  By showing the man himself.

I can't wait to see how much more we'll get on the DVD.  I hope it's plenty more as it seems this wonderful film could have been 3 times as long.I really want to see some of the bits they had to sacrifice due to runnign time.

5 out of 5 pawprints

Oh and by the way.  Make sure you take some tissues with you.

There is a podcast including bots from the Q&A here.

You can book your tickets for Cornerhouse showings here.

Killing Bono - No Spoilers

The trailer for this film had me hooked.  It looked funny, UK made, the title intrigued me and it had Robert Sheehan. Sheehan was the main draw to be honest.  I love his screen presence in Misfits and what I saw of him in Red Riding I liked.

The cast was definitely the best thing about this film with only one stand out terrible.  Whoever played the second Record producer we see.  That one took the comedy element too far and was just annoying.  Ben Barnes did a great job of making me dislike his character, a lot.  Sheehan was as amusing as he always is but had a chance to do some serious stuff as well.  I thought he was great.  I don't think I've seen Martin McCann before, he was good as Bono.  Very quiet performance, a nice change from the other performances in the film.  The warm your heart appearance came from Pete Postlethwaite who seems to have had fun in his final film.

The film is funny, yet sad for some of it's characters.  I have no idea how true it is.  Based on a memoir, who knows how far the Chinese Whispers effect has taken it.  Although there were good bits it did begin to drag and drag.  It was far too long.  It wasn't a bad film but I can't say it was a good one either.  I can't tell you who I'd blame for it not working for me either.  Maybe the length of it but it didn't seem to be just that.  It just felt a little flat in places and I'm not sure why.  I'm glad I've seen it, I don't feel they owe me my 2 hours back. I can't see me ever watching it again though.

2.5 pawprints out of 5

Source Code (Spoilers Hidden)

I've been looking forward to this.  I thought Moon was wonderful.  

Duncan Jones seems to have gone for a similar technique here.  Sourcing the right actors for the piece and not blowing a budget on huge sets and special effects.  Things are bigger here but not massively so.  The main growth is the size of the cast.  Though this is kept pretty small with good casting.

Gyllenhaal ties the whole film together well.  He's a likable screen presence you feel for and believe in.  Neither Farmiga or Monaghan drop the ball either.  It can't have been an easy film to keep your ball up in the air.  Due to they type of the tale they're telling.

I was surprised how much the story kept my attention due to the way it is told.  It very cleverly keeps your interest and keeps you guessing.  The film cuts between pretty claustrophobic sets and fantastic sweeping shots of Chicago and it's skyline.  

It's a nice 90 minute film that moves at a good pace.  Making it longer would definitely not have been a good idea.  I wish more directors would limit their films.

My problems with the film all come under the 'spoiler' tag below.  I do think however that it's a film worth seeing.  So do recommend it.  If you do go, come back and see if you agree with me.

SPOILERS BELOW - Rollover to view

My main problem with the film was Captain Goodwin's behaviour at the end of the film.  I just couldn't believe she would have risked future lives, after just saving tens of thousands, by actually killing the only proven test subject.

Next problem, the happy, neat ending.  If the film had stopped on the freeze frame it would have been much better.  The happy ever after in someone else's body didn't wash.  And, as my dad pointed out, what happened to the real Sean?  Is he now suffering a severe case of schizophrenia or was he extinguished to let Coulter live?

3.5 out of 5 pawprints

BritFilm - Submarine

I'd kept myself in the dark as much as possible about this film.  I'd heard it was directed by The IT Crowd's Moss and that it was about a self-obsessed teen, set in 1980's small town Wales.

I try my best to get to the cinema to see British films as much as I can.  Not always easy as they don't often have a long run.  But that's an old. often hashed gripe.

The first thing I noticed about this film was how beautifully some of the scenes were shot.  It looks absolutely lovely most of the time.  The use of the light is lovely.

The two leads are excellent.  They play their dry roles brilliantly. Both are slightly separate from the norm without becoming unbelievable.  The depiction of school life seems pretty apt.  No pretence when it comes to how self-interested and cruel teens can be.  The 3 main adult roles are played very well too.  Considine is great as a bit of an arsehole.  I'd say the whole film is slightly off from real life but maybe I've just had a sheltered life.  It's quirky without it being annoying.

The film is told in chapters.  Between each the screen fades to red or blue.  If there's a relevance to the colours I wish I could figure it out.  I;m glad I saw this at the cinema as it needed my attention.  It's one of those 'slow' films it's so easy not to give the attention they deserve at home.

For such a deadpan film it is very amusing in parts.  Although some of the times I was amused I shouldn't really have been finding those things funny :-S

The film flips pretty easily over the emotional happenings that occur.  Still giving the audience a chance to sympathise though.  I have to say if I had a son like Oliver I think I'd be rather spooked out by him.  He, his reactions and actions creeped me out somewhat.

My only complaint about the film was that it seemed to drag a little during the last third.  I can't pick any bits I would have removed but I was beginning to wonder how long it would be until the end.  I did enjoy this film but I can't see me buying the DVD when it's available.  I will be watching Richard Ayoade's next feature though.

3.5 out of 5 pawprints

The Lincoln Lawyer - Film Review

I was very nervous going into this film.  Connelly is one of my favourite authors.  I was thrilled to see Blood Work had been adapted for screen.  Until I saw it.  I was appalled.  Eastwood had taken the story and ripped it's guts out.

The watching began well.  The retro credit sequence had me interested straight away.  Funnily enough it was reminiscent of Zen's opening credits .  It was also the start of a great soundtrack.

I haven't seen McConaughey in anything for years.  Romantic comedies aren't really my bag.  I was dubious about what he would put on the screen before I went in.  My fears were unfounded.  He wasn't doing his 'poor man's Harrelson' he had the role spot on.  He portrayed the charm and the guile necessary.  

The entire cast was very 'typecast'.  They were all playing their typical roles.  In this instance though it worked perfectly.  I wouldn't have re-cast anyone.

Having just re-read the book I was on the lookout for alterations.  Yeah I know, I'm supposed to enjoy a film not disect it!  There were the odd changes here and there but they were minimal.  It was more a case of dropping the parts that weren't necessary to tell the tale.  The story stayed the same.

As I said I thought it was a great soundtrack.  It fitted the film perfectly.  Upbeat and keeping the flow more than a meaningful score.  This is the first time I've purchased a full soundtrack in a very long time.

I get the impression this wasn't a big budget picture.  What they did with the budget I really enjoyed though.  No flashy courtroom sets but wonderful shots here and there of LA.  The story rolls on at a good pace with no 'cinematic self-indulgences'.  The finale scenes aren't dragged out. Just finishing the story off well.  

I really enjoyed this film.  It adapted a book well and kept my interest totally.

4.5 stars out of 5   but that's a biased opinion ;-)  Not everyone will enjoy this as much as I.

The trailer

The King's Speech

I'd been itching to see this film for a while. The cast was impressive and it was a subject and era I wanted to know more about.

Within the first scene I was torn up for the Duke of York.  Firth had dragged me in immediately.  Between him and the direction I felt so much for the poor man.  It was painful to watch.  The setting of the scenes was very well done.  Maybe as it's not that far in the past that's easier to do.  After the Downton Abbey/Upstairs Downstairs hype recently we're in not unfamiliar surroundings.

This has a fantastic cast.  I'd heard all the award buzz about Firth's performance and wanted to see if it was worthy.  Well I was totally convinced a few scenes in that all the buzz was worth it.  That isn't to say that Bonham-Carter and Rush don't deserve much credit too.  They were both wonderful but didn't have half as much to do, especially physically, as Firth.  Special mention has to go to Derek Jacobi, he may not be on screen an awful lot but he's brilliant. Without ever overplaying the role. The only casting choice I was unsure about was Spall as Churchill. The fact that Churchill was necessary to play the part of others is also dubious but I can understand why he was inserted.  There's a short article here on the accuracy of the film.

I loved seeing a younger Queen Mother on screen.  I'm no royalist but I did admire her sense of duty after undertaking the  unwanted role of Queen Consort.  Especially so during WWII.  The story of Edward and Mrs Simpson is seen as a great love story.  I think not.  To me the great love story was that of Elizabeth and Bertie.

Guy Pearce is excellently pathetic as the Prince of Wales and the short reigning Monarch with no sense of the  duty his great privilege required.  I think it's pretty obvious what I think of the man.  However much I think I would have disliked Wallis Simpson, the woman did our country a huge favour.

The film really pulls on the emotions.  Something I'm against when it's done badly.  However I loved this film.  I thought it was wonderful.  I'm glad it pulled at my heartstrings.

To see an old London landmark in the opening scene brought a warm glow.  Maybe the first time I've been glad of CGI.

4.5 Pawprints.  I can;t give a film that tampers with historical fact 5.

The Girl Who Played With Fire

I have to confess that I've given up on the written trilogy.  I was finding the beginning of this book such a slog.  I really enjoyed the first film.  More than I enjoyed the book really.  For the first time ever I decided to ditch the books for what the celluloid version has to offer.  I've realised I haven't enough time for books I'm not actually enjoying reading.

I was glad to find that the part of the book I'd found incredibly dull was absent from the film.  They obviously had to make cuts to such a large novel.  The cuts that they made to the beginning of this were spot on IMHO.

I found this film as enjoyable as I had the first.  More so as I wasn't watching for differences after the first few scenes.  I did find certain aspects of the film a little far-fetched and a tad unbelievable.  Nothing more than I've put up with many times before and probably less than I'll find in the future.  

The most interesting part of the film was the interaction of Lisbeth with other people.  She couldn't keep her distance in this film as she could in the last.  That to me was the part I enjoyed most.  Seeing her have to develop as a character due to her actions.  Learning some of her back-story was also a bonus.  Noomi Rapace is excellent in this film as she was in the last.  I think if she had dropped the ball I would have enjoyed it far less.  She dwarves the other characters.  They are just there to propel her story along.  This can't be an easy role to play given the lack of expression.

Overall I enjoyed the film but it's far from a favourite.  I want to see the final installment but I'm hardly champing at the bit. 3 out of 5 pawprints.

Come Fly With George

The 2nd half of yesterday's double bill was considerably lighter.  Although it had it's bleak moments here and there.  I wasn't quite sure what to expect from the film.  I'd heard good things on the grapevine but I wasn't convinced.  Hollywood comedies aren't usually my first choice of film.  I'm glad I decided to give it a go though.

Again, a good cast made this film an enjoyable watch.  Clooney had a role he was made for.  He can do the drier, subtler types of comedy better than most actors, especially from the Hollywood breeding ground.  I suppose it can only help that he's so good to look at.  All three main roles were played well.  The protegee seemed quite wooden at times but I'm pretty sure she played it that way.

The film deals with a delicate subject in any economic climate.  The current one surely makes it even more so. The fact that the film itself didn't come over as callous as some of its characters I think is down to the screenplay.  Which is very well written.  Whilst taking on some of your more typical film ideas it deals with them in a much more interesting way than the usual fare.  This cannot be described as a Rom-Com yet it contains elements of both.

I was impressed and will definitely be watching this film again in the future.  If you like some intelligent comedy, that's still easy to watch give it a try yourself.

4 out of 5 pawprints

A Wander Along The Road

Today's double bill began with The Road.  A film I was dying to see due to the massive amount of reviews heaping praise on it.  I haven't read Cormac McCarthy's book so I can only judge it as a stand-alone piece.

Spoilers are hidden at the bottom of the post where stated.  Please highlight to view.

I concur this is a brilliant film.  It will be one that I'll be waiting a long time to re-watch though.  It is a bleak experience.  I can't remember seeing a film that is this bleak throughout. This only enhances the film though.  For me, it's the most 'realistic' post-apocalypse vision I've seen on-screen.  I've heard that most of the film was filmed in New Orleans and Mount St Helens.  It's certainly the greyest film I have seen in a very long time.  It makes me realise how lucky I am to live in such a safe environment.

The entire cast is excellent.  There wasn't a bum note throughout.  There couldn't be a more perfect role for Viggo Mortensen.  I completely believed in his character throughout.  He must have been so drained by the end of this film.  Kodi Smit-McPhee is fantastic as his son.  If there was to be a weak point in this film you'd fully expect it to be him.  To play such a sad, downbeat role throughout the entire film is hard enough.  To do it so well is remarkable.  The fact that he has the lead role in the US remake of Let the Right One In negates a little of my ire.  Only a little mind.

Charlize Theron has a much smaller role but also plays it excellently.  She is the perfect foil for Mortensen's character and his attitude to the situation they find themselves in.  Her story is told in the flashbacks that are littered throughout the film.  They are used well though and add to the story without becoming distracting or being the be all and end all of the story.

Speaking of smaller roles the cameo players are excellent.  They must have put in a lot of preparation to get into character for the roles.  They weren't starry cameos either.  Just people they met along the road.  The calibre of their performances was suitable to a much larger role.  They really were an asset to the piece.

There is no definite setting for this film.  We're never told the time or the place.  This can only prevent it from ageing before it's time.  This film seems destined to be a timeless classic.

Spoilers below, highlight to view.

I couldn't see how we could gain any hope from this film and how it would end.  We had just a sliver or two given to us.  I was impressed with how we were given these.  Just before a very tense scene, which leads in Mortensen's character's death, we were shown a single beetle and a lone bird in flight.  Is this because they're further South.  That the film neglects to tell us.

The boy meets another traveller on the beach.  One which we, the audience, have a gut feeling we can trust.  We are relieved when he gains the boy's trust.  Massively so when his family are revealed.  The boy finally has 'siblings' and a dog for company.  We know that these guys are careful as they'd avoided contact until teh boy was alone after his father's death.  We have hope that things will get better.  But if they do we know it will still be a long, harsh road ahead.  This is no typical 'happy ending'

4.5 pawprints out of 5 for The Road.