2012

The worst promo for the London Olympics yet.

Indy 5

Hey you! Are you one of those hysterical movie buffs who posts on the IMDB forums? You are? Well then, crack out your "they're raping my childhood memories" style hyperbole as Shia LaBeouf has let slip in a BBC interview with one of those blokes that used to do Newsround that His Exalted Greatness (that's Mr. Spielberg to you and me) has "cracked the story" for the fifth Indiana Jones film.

Den of Geek speculates 2012 will be the first available time for them to all get together.

Given the gap between Last Crusade and Crystal Skull I predict that this one will require John Candy in Wagons East style computer wizardry to complete it. And not just for Ford, for LaBeouf as well.

Futurama's Back Baby!

That's right! The best sci-fi show on telly (take that Battlestar Galactica (I'm sorry Battlestar Galactica I love you, please don't look at me like that)) is back for 26 new episodes probably next year. All the news and quotes from all the trade press are contained in that there link back there.

It means more of this:



And if you're a fan who bought all the DVDs then pat yourself on your extra special back as you probably helped save the show.

On yerselves!

Drag Me To Hell

The most striking thing about watching Sam Raimi's last film, the third Spiderman, is how lifeless the whole thing is. Raimi's movies, with the odd exception, tend to be thrill rides, the type of stuff that justifies the whole notion of cinema experience as rollercoster ride. Yet here it just feels somewhat uninspired, like he's going through the motions. Watching it would suggest a director who needs a break, and by that meaning he needs to make something else. Drag Me To Hell is that break, and a return for Raimi to the genre that he started in, horror. Look at it as Raimi being like a band who have become massive, and have been churning out bloated, emotionless albums for ages suddenly deciding to make an album that "goes back to their roots" so to speak. On other words make a cheap, quick effort that looks to capture the energy of those earlier works before the fame and mass expectations set in.

Realistically Raimi has only actually made one horror film, Evil Dead. The sequels are really comedies and The Gift isn't a scary film. Of course that one sojourn is a schlocky mess but rises above the rest of the genre thanks to its energy and Raimi's creative approach to camera work, editing and sound design. To realise how lacking Spiderman 3 is just watch it back to back with either of the first two Evil Deads. Raimi's approach to the horror genre is helped by his background in comedy, and in particular slapstick. Of course there are many similarities to the two genres and Raimi gets this, using his expert sense of comic timing to engineer tension before the release, in this case through a fright, although there are a few laughs too. It is this same approach that he brings for Drag Me To Hell.

To say that you should treat this movie with a pinch of salt is an understatement. In fact not doing so will probably seriously affect your overall opinion of it. This isn't arty Euro horror like Let The Right One In, but neither is it the sort of depraved, joyless effort that is represented by endless Saw sequels and remakes of already brutal and tasteless nasties from Evil Dead's era that makes up America's horror release schedule. This is dumb fun, but with an intelligence that only a highly creative mind can bring. So you get flying eyeballs, phlegm, bugs, a cake with an eye, a corpse that has a thing for hair, a possessed hankie, and a crappy CGI goat that's just hilarious, but kind of for the wrong reasons. To attempt to analyse Drag Me To Hell on any sort of social level the way you could, say, Romero's films would actually be doing it a disservice as you would only reveal how shallow it is. It's here to entertain and make you jump, and that is all. Of course there is the point that Capitalism, and more so individualism, is bad, but we all know that anyway. Instead just enjoy the ride.

Drag Me To Hell isn't by any stretch of the imagination a masterwork, neither is it some revolutionary horror here to shake up the genre's very foundations. Rather it's a decided old fashioned little horror film with scares, laughs and enough "ewww" moments to keep you entertained for its running time. It's safe to say that with this Sam Raimi has rediscovered his mojo and proves, as he did with Evil Dead, to be a master of the horror artform. Indeed it is to that genre's loss that he hasn't made more scary films. It's probably wrong to say it, but let's hope he burns out again soon.

Buffy The Movie (Again)

Aye that cracking wee bit of telly goodness Buffy The Vampire Slayer looks certain to be making the shift to the big screen. That is of course after it shifted from there to telly in the first place. But this time Buffy won't feature the man who created Buffy or Buffy herself. Sounds like a winner.

I'm not usually cynical, well okay I'm always way too cynical, but is it cynical of me to suggest that when Kuzui says:

"Everything has its moment. Every movie takes on a life at some point, and this seems like the moment to do this."

what was really meant was:

"Well Twilight made a shitload of cash and as a result vampires are, like, so in right now, hell even that weirdo Swedish number made money, that we'd be mad not to bring on some old skool teen vamp action"?

It's Been A While

Splice's been a bit quiet in May and there's a reason. First I got Swine Flu, or possibly just a cold, who can say, and then the utterly amazing brilliance of the Mega Shark Vs. Giant Octopus trailer left me stupefied for a couple of weeks. But now that double whammy of potential fatality has subsided and it's back to business as usual.

Now there hasn't really been a lot out in the cinema that looks any good during this time. Coraline does but I'd look like a pedo going to see it and Sodoku New York or whatever the new Charlie Kaufmann one's called has as an obscure showing schedule as the plot no doubt is. I'll try and have a gander at them if I can but next up is Sam Raimi's return to horror Drag Me To Hell. If all goes to plan I should be seeing it this week.


Obviously there is one mega, super-duper film I have so far ignored, Star Wars. Sorry that's Star Trek. I haven't seen it and to be honest I'm not a fan of the series and so I'm probably not the person ton comment on it if I do. One guy who is a fan is Glasgow comedian Limmy of the website of the same name (that was lucky him having the same name as a website) who posted the definitive review of the film on Youtube last week (warning contains SPOILERS and opinions that are Limmy's):



There's no point even trying to review it after that!

Mega Shark Vs. Giant Octopus

Yeah you read that title right! From Ruud's favourite studio Asylum, they of the "Mockbuster", comes what may be the greatest worst movie ever made!



Shark attacks plane. Oh you so know it's gonna be the tits!

In The Loop

For many years now Armando Iannucci has been one of the finest minds in comedy. Just look at the list of shows he has worked on either as writer, performer or producer (The Day Today, Alan Partridge, Time Trumpet) and talent he has nurtured as a result (Chris Morris, Lee And Herring, Steve Coogan) if you need proof. And yet his finest work may also be his most low key, both in style and the fact that it went out on BBC 4, The Thick Of It. Using a documentary style the viewer is granted access to the inner sanctum of New Labour, and later the identical Conservative camp, and in particular the spin machine designed to make it more important how an act is perceived than what the actual act actually is. Here we are introduced to Chief Spin Doctor Malcolm Tucker (Peter Capaldi), an expletive spewing monster and one of the finest creations ever to appear on telly. Only he's not really a creation as he is, supposedly very accurately, based on New Labour's real Spin Doctor Alistair Campbell. Basically every week a bumbling minister, and there are (too) many of those in British politics, would say or do something that reflects badly on the party and and Tucker would be left to sort it out. Things are no different here.

In The Loop sees Tucker shifted from London to Washington after cabinet minister Simon Foster (Tom Hollander) makes not one but two balls ups whilst discussing a potential war in the Middle East that sees him being courted by both the Hawks and the Peaceniks in the American regime. The first time we hear him speak he is talking about diarrhoea, quite appropriate for that to be coming out of his mouth really. This is a man who when attending an important meeting has to be reminded by note not to act like a tit. He's another in Iannucci's line of bumbling, mumbling public school educated fools who happen to be in charge of our country. Listening to him you can't help but picture Jack Straw, or any number of his grey, New Labour clones.

In this respect he is the perfect foil for Capaldi's Tucker, a man of absolute conviction in his own brilliance which allows him to rise above all those around him. You suspect Tucker's really in charge of the country and funnily enough as terrifying as that prospect is looking at the alternatives leaves you confused as to whether it really would be worse. Capaldi's performance is nothing short of brilliant. He absolutely becomes the hateful, cynical, conniving bastard and is clearly having the time of his life playing him in the improvisational environment Iannucci provides for his performers. Tucker is clearly the role of a lifetime for the actor and the relish he employs to every insult, every tirade and every "fuck" is just a joy to watch.

That said Paul Higgins as Jamie The Press Secretary almost upstages him. In the Night Of The Living Dead Rifftrax it is noted with tongue wedged in cheek that it's an interesting acting choice taken by Karl Hardman as Harry Cooper to start incredibly angry and escalate from there. Well that's exactly what Higgins does and this time it is a perfect choice. Jamie makes Tucker look nice. Whereas Malcolm may threaten people with violence it's very clear Jamie will happily follow through. He's only in a couple of scenes but almost steals the entire movie with his rant about why you never see a superhero builder before letting loose on some unfortunate office equipment while screaming about how angry he is at it.

Other memorable moments include Karen Clarke (Mimi Kennedy) having some dental problems during an important war related meeting, Lt. Gen. George Miller (James Gandolfini) attempting to calculate how many troops the U.S. has spare on a kid's Speak and Spell type toy, and Steve Coogan's slightly demented turn as a disgruntled constituent of Foster's who is having trouble with a wall. But most of all it's the dialogue that makes In The Loop great. To put it simply it's a joy just to revel in it. But it's not just there for show as the plot is almost entirely driven by it. It's a brave move, and one that should be applauded as Iannucci threats his audience with a respect most filmmakers would never afford them. It's brilliant just to watch a film that works on the assumption that the viewers are intelligent enough to follow what's going on without having to be shown.

In The Loop is an intelligent, brave and hilarious little character piece. It's also the best film of the year so far and one that suggests that after having ruled in the realm of television comedy for so long that he is now ready to do the same in the film world. Alan Partridge: The Movie anyone?

Watchmen

There can be nothing less encouraging for a director setting out to turn an unfilmable book into a successful movie than said book's author deriding the very notion of turning it into a film. That's the situation that faced Watchmen director Zack Snyder. Alan Moore, the original book's author, was effectively quoted as saying that his dense, dark and brilliant graphic novel wasn't designed to be anything other than a graphic novel. As a result Snyder's already seemingly impossible task, to make a competent film out of difficult source material that also appealed to the populace despite its brutal subject matter, while also appealing to fans of it such as himself, now had the added pressure of proving Moore wrong. And to this end Snyder comes through almost unscathed.

If you've read the book then you'll know how difficult a task making this film must have been. The vast, complex story unravels over multiple time lines and Moore uses various methods to tell it, moving beyond mere comic with an autobiography, newspaper clippings, police case files, academic writings and a comic within the comic that works on an allegorical level. Add to that that it's an ensemble piece containing some deep, brilliantly drawn out characters who inhabit an alternative 80's where Nixon's still president and the Cold War is reaching crisis point leading to a society in absolute meltdown. As a result there's a bleakness that could rival the grimiest torture porn/Noir hybrid yet to be made. Not really the ideal basis for the year's first big blockbuster is it?

Credit has to go to Snyder for even creating something coherent out of this source material. Many of the decisions he has made are not only daring, but at times are quite simply brilliant. Obviously with such a dearth of source material some things had to go, while others had to be incorporated in other ways. This is where Snyder and the writers should actually take most credit. Some things are easy to do without (Tales Of The Black Freighter) but the brave decisions mainly relate to the back story of the earlier superhero group the Minutemen. Their story is pretty much covered in a breathtaking opening montage set to The Times They Are A-Changin'. It covers a lot of important information in little over three minutes. Another brave decision relates to the endgame. I won't ruin anything but the changes mean that it ties to one of the characters and actually explains some actions by him better. Plus it cuts out a whole subplot from the book. Personally I think it's actually a bit better than Moore's original ending.

Choices like these prove that Snyder has a love of the source material that helped in making these decisions, but his fandom also works against him at times. As much as the changes help Watchmen as a film it means that some aspects are lost. The biggest problem is with Rorcshach, a character so brilliant the film could have been entirely about him. Sadly it feels as if the reasons for his state of mind are only touched upon, but then if there was an in depth look into his childhood that the book affords the movie would come to a grinding halt. The problem is that on other occasions he chooses to stick too closely to the book, meaning that the pacing starts to suffer anyway. It's as if Snyder became too fearful of changing too much, maybe thinking about the fans, maybe thinking about Moore's comments. At times it feels a little bit like he is trying to prove him wrong, that Watchmen the movie can be as great as Watchmen the book.

There are other problems beyond pacing. Some of the effects aren't great, the whole Mars sequence looks particularly X-Box-y. Dr. Manhattan's another problem. After Gollum and the newest Kong he feels a bit more Jar Jar, although his big, blue penis is absolutely stunning! Those boffins really crunched those ones and zeroes to get that thing flapping just right. I jest of course. Some of the non-CG performances are a little suspect as well. Jeffrey Dean Morgan (The Comedian) and Jackie Earle Haley (Rorschach) are both great and Billy Crudup does his best behind the CG as Manhattan but Malin Akerman (Silk Spectre II) is nothing short of dreadful. One has the suspicion that she was cast because of how she looked in the costume. Her only good scene is the sex scene and that's down to what she brings to it visually. Funnily enough it's the opposite problem with Matthew Goode (Ozymandias) who brings a smugness to the role that feels right. The problem is that he's meant to be this perfect specimen of man yet looks like the kid at school who would get repeatedly battered for being "a bit small" and now he's went and gotten himself a big muscle suit, a la Batman And Robin, just to show them. Shamefully he looks like a man mountain with a wee head.

Watchmen is a brave film, and one that to a large extent works. There are some major problems with it but on the whole it's a pretty enjoyable romp. The problem is that it should be more than that. Snyder has done a commendable job of bringing a very hard project to the screen, but, much like in his previous films, things are a little too shallow once you get beyond the brilliant visuals. In the end Watchmen does work as a film, but one that can't live up to its brilliant source material.

Gran Torino

Right, I know this has been out for ages, in fact so long it's probably not in the pictures anymore, but I saw it and then for several reasons, none particularly interesting, the review just fell through the cracks.

I was going to talk about the fact that Gran Torino is an immensely enjoyable film that features a great, possibly final, performance from Clint. I was going to talk about the fact that it overcomes some ropey performances from a few of the cast and some cheesy scenes, such as the one where Walt confronts a gang of black guys hassling his neighbour and her "wigga" boy pal, thanks to a glut of really great moments. I was even going to comment on the fact that the film makes casual racism fun! Not really. You see I was going to talk about how Walt is so emotionally damaged that he has to keep everyone at a distance and what easier way to do that than racially abusing them? And I was also going to say that Clint actually sings in this and that by doing so has allowed Jamie Cullum to turn in the first song of his that upon hearing it doesn't make me want to kill everything standing between he and my awful, awful vengeance.

But the review never got written so now I'm not able to talk about those things. Sorry. You'll just need to decide for yourself if you should have seen this when it was out or not.