Reviews by PvtCaboose91

Direct Contact is just another standard "if you've seen one, you've seen 'em all" direct-to-DVD action flick. Aging action star Dolph Lundgren is this picture's focal selling point - without a performer like Lundgren, there'd be nothing of any interest to anybody since the cast is filled with small-time actors no-one gives a damn about. To the credit of director Danny Lerner and writer Les Weldon, Direct Contact assuredly entertains with a non-stop string of incredibly violent action sequences. As long as you're prepared to suspend your disbelief (describing this film as preposterous is an understatement) and overlook general filmmaking incompetency, this low-budget actioner delivers precisely what you'd expect. Direct Contact was purportedly a mere stepping stone for the Dolphster - he was compelled to appear, and the production company (Nu Image) in return allowed him to direct and star in Command Performance.

The protagonist here is Mike Riggins (Lundgren); a lethal black ops soldier caught smuggling and dumped in a Russian prison for perpetuity. He lands a Get Out of Jail Free card when an American diplomat (Paré) negotiates his release, offering Mike freedom and $100,000 to rescue a woman named Ana (May) who was kidnapped by a ruthless war lord in Eastern Europe. Mike promptly carries out his orders, but after killing a bunch of incompetent soldiers and saving Ana, he realises he's been snookered. Both Ana and Mike are then hunted by tonnes of seriously ill-tempered, heavily-armed bad guys.

The story is strictly well-worn territory. The plot is also thin, incredibly lazy, and non-existent yet unfathomable at the same time. Nothing is ever set up, and plot elements are just glossed over. It seems everything apart from the action is an inconvenience to the filmmakers. This story is a trite waste of time driven by plot holes and unbelievable contrivances.

The characters are all clichéd and one-dimensional. Gina May's performance is easier on the eyes than the ears - she's a woeful actress whose performance is complemented with horrid dialogue. The film's villainous cohorts are tediously contrived and evil in the most stereotypical of ways. Michael Paré has become an Uwe Boll regular, thus for the performer to feature in a low-rent actioner is forgivable. James Chalke is notably awful; awkwardly fumbling around, playing one of the worst screen villains ever committed to celluloid. At least Dolph Lundgren manages to provide his fans with a few thrills. He's a pretty stoic performer, but Lundgren packs a serious punch for a guy in his fifties. Director Danny Lerner isn't exactly known for high-calibre screenplays (he has penned a few Steven Seagal films) or top-quality features (he directed Shark in Venice and Raging Sharks), so it comes as no surprise that Direct Contact is pretty bad. He simply can't pry decent performances out of his actors, and he's unable to write dialogue that doesn't sound forced and/or clichéd. Even worse, Lundgren and Gina exhibit zero chemistry, and it's disconcerting to portray the two of them in a romantic fashion considering that they could pass off as father and daughter.

Direct Contact is at least very violent, and the main bad guy succumbs to a legendary death sequence. When the Dolphster is granted the opportunity to fire upon his enemies with an array of firearms, loaded blood squibs explode with reckless abandon. This is an unapologetically hard-R picture, gleefully embracing its hyper-violent late '80s action pedigree. Sinew blasts from the ruined uniforms of soldiers during the rampant gunplay exchanges, bringing back memories of Arnold Schwarzenegger's Commando in several ways. The majority of the budget was clearly blown on both blood squibs and pyrotechnics. Even the abandoned building in which the climax takes place is packed with a convenient stash of gas barrels just lying around, waiting to explode. Direct Contact is incredibly stupid as well, with Dolph's Mike Riggins walking out into the open during multiple action sequences when he has guns trained on him! Throughout virtually every action sequence, soldiers have clear shots at their target but conveniently miss. The only hit Mike ends up sustaining is a conveniently-placed flesh-wound which is used to create a tired set-up for a love scene later in the film.

The action is thankfully more 'old school' - it's devoid of silly split-second editing that plagues most action films of the current era. While the imagery is admittedly infused with at least some degree of flair, the filming/editing collaboration is simply woeful, generating constant continuity errors. Probably the worst action sequence in the film occurs at a stadium - choppy beyond all belief. The car chases are also a bit too standard and lack energy, not to mention a lot of the footage has quite obviously been sped up. The result is a merely watchable actioner.

Fundamentally an amalgam of Commando and the Dolphster's own The Mechanik (a.k.a. The Russian Specialist), Direct Contact is a flawed but enjoyable action film. It's taut and brisk at about 85 minutes, and it provides bagfuls of blood and gore, but all elements of this film are mediocre at best. Still, Dolph Lundgren kicks things up a notch and holds your attention with a kung-fu grip. The aging but still awesome Dolph partaking in some entertaining action sequences makes Direct Contact exciting enough to ensure it's at least worth watching.

4.8/10

The critical mind boggles when one is faced with the task of reviewing a film entitled Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus. The title itself reveals everything you need to know about this B-Grade monster schlock - the plot, the major set-pieces, and above all the genre. Cinematic schlock is created when a preposterous concept is meshed with an inept approach, generating a perfect storm of celluloid patheticness that guarantees plenty of laughs (intentional or otherwise). There are instances when sheer filmmaking incompetency produces a deliciously awful experience - such movies triggered the creation of the term "so bad it's good". Lovers of such lunacy will adore Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus; this low-budget creature feature filmed in twelve days and completed barely four months afterwards. With its sloppy CGI, uproariously ridiculous plot points and lame acting, Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus is an instant camp classic as opposed to a standard cinematic stool sample. It's certainly bad, but deliberately so - winking at the audience frequently along the way. Expecting anything from this feature apart from a good time revelling in awfulness would be setting yourself up for disappointment.

Now, the plot... Wow, this'll be easy. A Megalodon shark and a gigantic octopus were frozen in mid-combat back during the Ice Age. Millions of years later, the glacier containing these prehistoric combatants melts, reviving the creatures. After these monsters wreak havoc on the world and inflict massive casualties on the human populace (mostly off-screen, which is unfortunate because what we do see is hilariously awesome), a marine scientist (Gibson) along with her newfound Japanese counterpart (Chao) and daffy Irish mentor (Lawlor) are brought in to assist with the situation. Initially the scientists try to capture the gargantuan animals, using pheromones as bait. (Of course, no-one is concerned with how the fuck they'd be able to keep these specimens alive for research...logistics is never an issue for the characters.) But predictably, this plan fails, so it's time for Plan B: lure the two creatures away from civilisation and allow them to fulfil the prophecy of the film's title.

We're subjected to a clichéd "laboratory scene" while the characters are trying to figure out how to kill the titular creatures, wherein the scientists make weird faces, mix coloured liquids in beakers for no reason, look through microscopes and scribble down notes. Lots of jargon is thrown into the script in an attempt to make the military sound authentic as well - plenty of "Plan Delta" and "Zero One Niner". There's even a Japanese submarine supposedly in Japan that's inhabited by a crew who speak perfect English without the slightest hint of a Japanese accent.

Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus opens with an assortment of inexpensive stock shots of snowy mountains punctuated with inexpensive stock shots of the sea. A helicopter apparently drops some sort of sonic wave thingy into the sea since he's on some kind of top-secret government mission. Be aware that we never actually see said helicopter flying over the water...we're just shown footage of it flying amongst the clouds. The one shot of the helicopter flying is reused about three or four times before the shot is flipped to show the helicopter flying in the opposite direction which is then reused a few times.

The highlight of this motion picture is undoubtedly the hilarious sequence during which the Mega Shark attacks an airborne passenger plane...the shark literally leaps thousands of feet out of the water and grabs the jet with its mouth. Never mind that the impact upon landing back in the ocean should kill the shark. In addition to this, the film's "Money Shot" moment shows the Mega Shark taking a chomp out of the Golden Gate Bridge. Meanwhile, the Giant Octopus swats planes with its tentacles and dismembers an entire oil rig. Absurd and unconvincingly executed, yet it's glorious! Absolutely glorious! The epitome of bad monster movie awesomeness!

Jack Perez writes and directs under the pseudonym of Ace Hannah (I shit you not), loading the screen with overinflated dialogue, well-worn clichés and laughable action sequences. Due to this, you'll be giddily awaiting to see where he'll take this mess next. One assumes Perez billed himself as Ace Hannah to make his name sound more B-Movie-esque. However it's more likely that the man was mortified by what he'd created and desperately wanted to distance himself from it.

Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus is unmistakably fun, but it's also underwhelming. While there are some awesome moments of Mega Shark and Giant Octopus mayhem guaranteed to tickle your B-Movie funny bone, one will be yearning for more. The film unfortunately fails to deliver a truly epic duel between the gigantic sea monsters. The concept is definitely too ambitious given the budgetary restrictions, though every penny appears on the screen. The computer animation looks cheap and is never realistic, but it isn't brutally bad either. The actual fight between the shark and the octopus sadly looks more like a bizarre mating ritual. They bump into each other, and then it appears that the octopus is humping the Megalodon. Perhaps the pheromones made an impact and the thing is trying to fuck its opponent to death.

The filmmakers cut corners whenever possible. Certain computer-animated shots are repeated a lot, including one sequence which features the very same shot three or four times during a ten second period. The shark vs. octopus encounter itself is just the same few shots on a loop. Although the shots are hokey and the repetition is glaringly obvious, they do the job at least, and all the fakery adds to the film's charm. The standard studio sets are also quite comical. Look out for the interior ship set - it's used twice as two different US battleships and once as a Chinese submarine, and it's very obvious as well. Again, it adds to the charm. The editing is pretty shoddy as well. Some live action shots are reused a lot, for instance. On top of this, at one stage the pilot of a jet radios a mayday about being knocked out of the sky before he's actually knocked out of the sky. The same type of thing also occurs during the shark/plane sequence. Once again, this is all part of the charm.

In the cast you'll find former singer Debbie Gibson as the female protagonist and Vic Chao as the Japanese associate - both are hilariously awful. Lorenzo Lamas delivers an expectedly wooden performance with crummy dialogue to match, but he can be forgiven due to his use of the term "Sharkzilla". However, it seems Lamas doesn't actually know what type of film he's making as he appears to take everything a bit too seriously. Alongside these "actors" is Sean Lawlor (whose filmography also includes Braveheart) who at least looks like he's trying. Every piece of bad, laughable dialogue is delivered with straight faces by these performers.

Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus is gormless, unrealistic, cheesy, and great! The budget doesn't allow the film to fulfil its potential (a big-budget Hollywood remake should be in order), but the 'fun factor' is firmly in place. God knows there are countless criticisms you can throw at the movie, but the enthusiasm cannot be denied. Just watch the film in context and remember exactly what it is. If you like good old-fashioned schlock, this fast-paced 85-minute B-Movie bonanza overflowing with campy glee will bring a smile to your face.

5.4/10

This is a classic cartoon unmatchable for its sheer audacity and imagination. I mean, who would've thought anyone would ever make a movie about a Walt Disney character coming across the mammoth creature of myth!? It's just totally out of the blue and random, and in turn utterly brilliant. The artist behind this exceptional creation apparently made this little film for a school project when his originally-planned live action movie was not going to be completed on time.

In 1994 this hilarious gem of a film was voted as #38 of the 50 Greatest Cartoons of all time by members of the animation field. This was very well deserved. Surely you can spare 90 seconds of your time watching this concoction of subtle comedy ("Bambi's wardrobe designed by...") and just good old-fashioned laughs. One shot, one main gag. Nuff said.

You'll find it right here: [Link removed - login to see]

9.0/10

Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li is not only a compelling early contender for the worst film of 2009, but it's also a contender for the worst film of all time! This second attempt at a screen adaptation of the revered Capcom video game series is unbelievably awful in every aspect. Generic action sequences, atrocious acting, cringe-inducing dialogue and lacklustre filmmaking are all combined, resulting in an hour and a half of pure cinematic torture. The first time the Street Fighter video game empire was adapted for the big screen, it concerned (a cartoonishly costumed) Jean-Claude Van Damme and Kylie Minogue trying to rescue the world from the evil clutches of (an infirmed) Raul Julia...and the film tanked! Now in 2009, fifteen years later, we've been given Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li - a production armed with a few clumsy television actors, Chris Klein, and a member of the Black Eyed Peas. This is not progress! With Andrzej Bartkowiak at the helm (who also directed the awful film adaptation of Doom), this feature is incredibly inept, and even that's putting it lightly. Most disheartening is that this dreck is unable to deliver the barest of bare-knuckle guilty pleasures promised by the genre. So what's left? Absolutely nothing.

At least 20th Century Fox were aware of the dud they had on their hands - they didn't screen the movie for the critics, and apparently most of the theatres showing this reel of used toilet paper only screened it once or twice a day. Why does this movie even exist, anyway? The Street Fighter video game series peaked in the '90s, which justifies the Van Damme movie. This latest rendition, however, is unjustifiable.

The plot concerns Chun-Li (Kreuk) who travels to Bangkok after receiving an enigmatic scroll (oddly enough, this scroll literally looks like a piece of paper that has been shoddily glued onto a piece of cheap cardboard). The streets of Bangkok are ruled by a crime syndicate called Shadaloo, headed by criminal mastermind Bison (McDonough) and his right hand man Balrog (Duncan). It seems Chun-Li battles this crime syndicate to save the city and because they kidnapped her father when she was a kid. Meanwhile, Interpol Agent Charlie Nash (Klein) is equally passionate to stop Bison and take down Shadaloo.

The story does not make much sense. Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li simply limps along from one poorly-staged set-piece to the next, climaxing with a whimper rather than a bang. It lacks both coherence and flow. This 2009 picture is distinctly different to the catastrophic 1994 movie failure, exchanging the cartoon atmosphere for a grittier tone that concentrates on revenge scenarios rather than a world domination plot. Justin Marks' script is surprisingly straight-faced...far too serious for its own good. It's also just really badly written. When a character seeks information on Shadaloo, they simply use the internet. No secret is safe from the internet, after all. When Chun-Li needs to know about a secret shipment, she finds a random guy on the wharf and breaks his arm to extract the relevant information. With the help of a guy named Gen, Chun-Li is trained to become a supreme master of kung-fu. This transformation from naïve fighter to highly skilled warrior takes all of five minutes, and mostly involves marbles being pelted at her.

Here's the big problem: both Street Fighter films have next to nothing to do with the actual video game. The basic concept behind Street Fighter is gloriously simple: two fighters face off in the ring, attacking each other with a variety of kicks, punches and special moves until one is beaten into submission. A serviceable film adaptation could be derived from the same formula (maybe a tournament movie like Bloodsport?), but both attempts so far work from a needlessly complicated and ridiculously silly story (in this case a meandering crime syndicate tale which takes forever to unfold). The Legend of Chun-Li is much further removed from the video game than the Van Damme vehicle preceding it. This is only a Street Fighter movie by name, and because a few classic characters have cameos. Chun-Li at one stage fights Vega (one of the video game's coolest characters), but he gets a minute or two of screen-time and just seems like a poor imitation of Wolverine with his giant metal claws.

At its core, Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li is a martial arts demonstration reel, but it's an extremely unimpressive one. For a big studio release, the technical accomplishments are extremely subpar. The strictly ordinary choreography during the fight sequences is captured with scarcely a modicum of skill - some clumsy cinematography which is amplified by the choppy editing. It's impossible to lighten up and embrace the violence when it's just a blur occasionally punctuated by a famous Street Fighter finishing move. These are just silly wire-work sequences during which no-one ever seems to get hurt, and one is unable to get any sense of a character's brute force or skill. The gun battles are just routine, PG-13 filler. In fact, so is the entire movie as it lamely lurches from conflict to conflict in a programmed manner. Some of the gun battles do look mildly cool, but these are unfortunately few and far between. The Legend of Chun-Li cannot be considered a movie - it's a God forsaken tragedy! It reels in some of the most pathetic actors in the industry who are aching for their existence to be acknowledged, and gives them a vastly stupid script to regurgitate.

The acting is atrocious right across the board. Chris Klein delivers one of the most laughably awful screen performances of the decade, making Van Damme seem Oscar-worthy in comparison. His portrayal of Nash is beyond awful - not only can he not act, but he was probably drunk during filming. The performer (calling him an actor would be a questionable compliment) assumes a strange mix of Clint Eastwood and metrosexual paedophile as he desperately tries to come across as a tough guy. It's frankly hilarious to observe his cheese, especially in the presence of the other actors who seriously look as if they're holding back giggles. His character also favours a pistol over hand-to-hand fighting, so why is he even included in the film?! Throughout this cinematic abomination, I was actually missing the acting skills of Jean-Claude Van Damme... And as for the rest of the cast... Neal McDonough might've fared better had he not used such a goofy Irish accent (Bison is a quintessential Irish surname, after all). One-time Oscar nominee Michael Clarke Duncan is reduced to playing the character Balrog, while a host of other actors (Robin Shou, Josie Ho and the attractive Moon Bloodgood) are unfathomably woeful as the one-dimensional stock characters. Kristin Kreuk is hot, but it seems she was deceased throughout the filming period as she boasts just one expression and one tone of voice. She also does a thoroughly awful job of faking martial arts moves before her stunt double steps in.

Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li is tiresome, brain-dead and ill-considered. It'd be impossible for anyone to have a legitimately enjoyable time watching this awful motion picture which delivers nothing apart from an inconsistent crime plot. Unfortunately, the makers behind this Street Fighter movie are unable to put together a martial arts scene that's worth a damn. Not even morbidly curious film-goers should give this one a shot unless they also have masochistic tendencies.

1.5/10

Three years after the screen adaptation of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code stormed the box office and became one of the decade's most profitable movies, the inevitable sequel Angels & Demons (also based on a novel by Brown) steps up to bat. Brown's Angels & Demons novel was written as a visceral and concise action-thriller, directly contrasting the more famous but ponderous Da Vinci Code. With the filmmakers able to infuse this Angels & Demons adaptation with suspense, thrills and a larger scale, the novel was certainly a more Hollywood-friendly property. It seems the filmmakers have also learned a number of lessons from the significantly-panned Da Vinci Code film - Angels & Demons is a tighter, more agreeable, more widely appealing and all-round superior mystery thriller with more action and less exposition. Screenwriters Akiva Goldsman and David Koepp thankfully aren't as bound to the literary word for this sequel, streamlining a lot of the narrative's notable excesses in order to produce a more digestible film. Yet there are still inherent flaws due to Brown's writing style: plot heavy and with little characterisation, the film has no real weight beyond its on-screen occurrences. The absurd nature of the prose has of course been carried over as well.

Interesting fact: since Dan Brown's Angels & Demons novel was published prior to The Da Vinci Code, it is supposed to be Robert Langdon's debut adventure. Alas, Hollywood has reworked the facts and Angels & Demons has become the follow-up.

We learn at the beginning of the film that the Pope has died, and officials within the Vatican are ready to begin the process of determining his successor. Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon (Hanks) is recruited by the Vatican when an ancient secret society (known as the Illuminati) delivers an ominous threat. Determined to disrupt the post-mortem search for a new Pope, Illuminati agents kidnap the four 'preferitti' (primary hopefuls for the new Pope), and steal a canister containing antimatter which is planted in a hidden passageway under Rome. Robert Langdon is accompanied by a physicist named Vittoria (Zurer) as he busily dashes around the labyrinthine city with only a single evening to carefully decipher a series of puzzles while mangled corpses are delivered on the hour in the lead-up to the possible annihilation of Vatican City.

Howard engages in suspense mode from the very beginning as the story delivers kidnappings, poisonings, Illuminati gunplay, split-second decoding, the occasional burst of violence, and above all an energetic chase all over Vatican City as Robert and Vittoria sniff out clues amongst the religious paraphernalia. With the ticking clock being the fading battery on the antimatter bomb to ratchet up the tension, Angels & Demons is enjoyably spry, even with shovelfuls of exposition powering the story's increasing absurdity. But Howard is able to sell the premise effectively, and for the average film-goer the holes in the story will only become clear while examining the film in hindsight. Lacking the verbosity of The Da Vinci Code, Howard and company have adapted Brown's novel the way it was intended to be - as a beautiful, big-budget Hollywood action-thriller. Angels & Demons is a fairly adult-minded movie-going event, and a fulfilling one at that. It's similar to National Treasure, except more mature and without the snarky comedy. This is also a hard PG-13, with a surprising abundance of disturbing imagery and blood. Five minutes were reportedly trimmed from the theatrical cut to avoid an R rating.

Angels & Demons is visually compelling and narratively engrossing without ever being genuinely breathless. Ron Howard directs with total conviction, with Hans Zimmer's grand score extremely befitting of the breathtaking imagery. A highlight of Angels & Demons is the convincing recreation of Vatican City. The production crew were banned from filming on location and were forced to create virtually everything on soundstages, though you'd never know it (minor location filming was conducted using a fake working title, though). With luxury cars speeding through Rome's crowded streets, the movie alternates between location shooting, CGI-enhanced vistas, and intricately detailed film sets with speed and elegance, creating the illusion that the characters are actually inside the grand European city. Cinematographer Salvatore Totino generates a strong European visual aesthetic and the editing is energetic. On the whole Howard's film is nail-biting for the majority of its runtime, but it's frequently mired by its flawed script.

Unfortunately, none of the characters inhabiting Angels & Demons possess any degree of depth - they're empty ciphers who journey from A to B. The first 90 minutes of the film deliver a portion of "treadmill proceedings" - i.e. the characters are always moving but get nowhere. During this period Langdon uncovers improbable clues that lead to further clues instead of leading directly to the solution. Even if one misses a few chunks of exposition, the plot-by-numbers storyline is quite simple to follow. For the perceptive film-goer, the big "twist" ending can be easily deciphered by about an hour into the picture. And when the niceties of the overall conspiracy are finally revealed, it's pretty underwhelming - we were originally led to believe it would be more fascinating. The whole conspiracy doesn't make much sense either if you think about it. By all means, Angels & Demons is absurd as well - the conspiracy was masterminded by two evil characters devoid of clear motivations, one of which is a solitary hitman (Lie Kaas) able to pull off crimes even a big organisation wouldn't have the manpower to commit. Running at about 135 minutes, Angels & Demons becomes cumbersome, especially during the final act. Nevertheless, director Howard is a master of his craft, and the film is technically competent. It's a testament to Howard's cinematic skills that he's able to make this ludicrous story work as an engaging thriller.

The conflict of science vs. religion lies at the centre of Angels & Demons. This commentary is an essential component of the narrative, and the screenplay imparts a perspective for both minds. The film is not an exhaustive mental exercise, but the debate prevents the material from slipping into a dull routine of peril and tongue-twisting monologues.

Tom Hanks submits a solid, confident performance as the film's central protagonist, but he's unable to escape the formulaic nature of the enterprise. The supporting players are unhelpful idiots included to keep the plot stirring. Ayelet Zurer plays Vittoria Vetra; a physicist with smarts and charm. Her character is undermined by lack of development, however, and she's forgettable as a result. Ewan McGregor's portrayal of Camerlengo Patrick McKenna is bursting with charisma. Again, it's an underwritten part, but McGregor continually commands the frame. Stellan Skarsgård is suitably menacing and effective as the head of the Vatican security apparatus, while Armin Mueller-Stahl exudes authority in a key supporting role. As the mysterious assassin, Nikolaj Lei Kaas does a decent job.

This sequel to 2006's The Da Vinci Code offers a heightened sense of danger and another self-assured performance courtesy of Tom Hanks. Angels & Demons is a well-paced and serviceable action-thriller dressed in religious mumbo jumbo. Due to its absurd nature, the film relies on continuous forward momentum to ensure an audience hasn't much time to ponder it too deeply. Aiming to engross more than provoke discussion, the film is admittedly entertaining as it throttles towards a predictable conclusion. Since this is one of the highest grossing films of 2009 (in excess of $450 million worldwide), it's likely that another Robert Langdon adventure will materialise.

6.7/10

Push is of a rare breed - it's a comic book-style action-thriller modelled from an original concept not directly based on any comics or graphic novels. Director Paul McGuigan has managed to fashion a fresh, effective superhero adventure (with a small budget of approximately $38 million) complete with an interesting mythology, hinting that additional instalments/spin-offs are to come. As this is a visible attempt to birth a new franchise, plot threads are purposely left without closure, ideas feel underdeveloped, and several possibilities are skimmed over. Unfortunately, while this isn't a screen adaptation of any particular comic book, Push is a Frankenstein's monster - a jumbled collage of narrative clichés supplemented with elements stitched together from various other sources (hints of X-Men and NBC's Heroes are undeniable). Push has inevitably been compared to 2008's Jumper since both movies are clearly designed to be the first chapter in a multi-part saga. Push is similarly flawed of course, but as a whole this is a far more entertaining and satisfying experience.

In the world of Push, an array of humans with abnormal abilities are scattered throughout the general population. These gifted individuals are given single-word titles to describe their skills, ranging from "Movers" (those with telekinesis) to "Watchers" (those who see into the future) to the titular "Pushers" (telepathic individuals). The government are aware of these capabilities, and have set up a department (known as the "Division") to weaponise them. The story takes place in Hong Kong and centres on a Mover named Nick (Evans) who teams up with a Watcher named Cassie (the delightful Fanning) who's trying to free her mother from government custody. Their path intersects with that of Nick's former lover - a high-level Pusher named Kira (Belle) who's being hunted by the Division. Nick, Cassie and Kira (with a few other powerful allies) aim to take down the Division, while a powerful Pusher named Carver (Hounsou) is working to recapture Kira. An Asian group of super-humans are also thrown into the fray.

Director Paul McGuigan provides Push with a frantic pace that keeps the energy level high while also obfuscating the film's logical flaws. ("Screamers" attack using sound, and sound is just air being pushed. Why can't the Movers deflect the sound?) Plot holes and logical flaws only come to light while examining the film in hindsight, and don't majorly effect the average viewer's enjoyment as the story unfolds. To the credit of McGuigan and screenwriter David Bourla, Push is fairly unpredictable, and for that reason it only occasionally drags during the two-hour runtime. With all of the subplots and badly-defined characters, the plotline - in spite of possessing a reasonably simple trajectory - is confusing and doesn't make a lot of sense. Push is unbelievably convoluted - the dense narrative is teeming with unfamiliar terms, unexplained powers and undefined allegiances. The filmmakers should have toned down the intricacy in order to make this action-thriller more palatable.

Though the script is mediocre at best, Push fires on all cylinders in every other aspect. The film plays out in the breathtaking city of Hong Kong, which is a welcome change from the Hollywood tradition of setting every story in Los Angeles or New York. With the film set in this grand Asian city, McGuigan is able to pack the screen with the bright colours of a different culture. The results are magnificent. McGuigan and cinematographer Peter Sova create fine, richly-textured images, allowing a viewer to get lost in the pictures and not worry about the film's convoluted plotline. Interestingly, due to budget constraints and the impossibility of controlling Hong Kong streets, the majority of the film was shot "guerrilla style" - hidden cameras rolled while the actors did their scenes in one take on the crowded streets. As Push was intended to mark the commencement of a new franchise, it concentrates more on the character element, and it's worryingly low on thrills as a result. Happily, however, the action sequences are nonetheless terrific, especially the final battle which functions as a showcase for the characters' super-human abilities. The special effects during these battles are amazing considering the budget McGuigan had to play with.

The lead performances by Chris Evans and Dakota Fanning are solid, and precisely what a feature like this truly needs. Evans, whose prior films include Cellular and Fantastic Four, is fun to watch and manages to bring amiable human qualities to the occasionally ridiculous material. Dakota Fanning, however, is the standout performer here - she owns every frame. Young Ms. Fanning is clearly setting a course for a post-adolescent career, sinking her teeth into her punk-edged role with tremendous zeal. Push is worth seeing for the fact alone that we get to see her drunk at one stage, and toying with firearms on another occasion. Faring less well on the acting front is Camilla Belle, who appears to sleepwalk rather than act. The romance between Evans and Belle is an even bigger miscalculation - the actors share no chemistry whatsoever. Luckily, Dakota is always there to fall back on (she turns up drunk immediately after the typical PG-13 sex scene between the couple).
Djimon Hounsou is a chilling villain. The actor avoids going over-the-top, and his calm, subdued performance is more menacing as a result. The supporting cast includes the always sublime Cliff Curtis in addition to Ming-Na and Nate Mooney, all of whom play sympathetic individuals with powers who support Nick's quest.

There's an ambitious back-story behind Push, and if a sequel materialises the filmmakers will have no difficulty electing new avenues to explore. In fact, this movie is almost too short. Given another 15 or 20 minutes, subjects could have been expanded and ideas could have been better mined. Just like Jumper, there's untapped potential within the concept begging to be delved into.
Thanks to its Hong Kong setting, Push is bestowed a unique personality and frenetic energy. The film may be a jumbled concoction of everything from X-Men to The X-Files to the TV show Heroes, and its story is incomprehensible at times, but it's nevertheless a fun romp. A blah script aside, there's plenty to like about Push - it's a worthy attempt at a new comic book mythology, especially since it wasn't based on any particular comic.

6.3/10

Wrestler-turned-actor John Cena returns to the big screen under the guidance of venerable action director Renny Harlin with 12 Rounds. Enjoyable, brainless and completely pretension-free, this fast-paced action-thriller is fundamentally a mishmash of Die Hard: With a Vengeance and Speed, and it's a blast of pure fun as long as you can suspend your disbelief. Unfortunately, the title star's lack of range as an actor makes Arnold Schwarzenegger seem nuanced by comparison. WWE Wrestler John Cena made his acting debut in 2006's The Marine - a woeful dumb-as-rocks actioner that lacked both style and kinetic energy. One could consider 12 Rounds to be a duplicate of The Marine, but it'd be erroneous to believe such a thing. After all, why would Cena traverse through the same territory twice? In The Marine, Cena played an unstoppable marine whose wife is kidnapped by a bunch of bad guys. And in 12 Rounds, Cena plays an unstoppable police officer whose girlfriend is kidnapped by a bad Irishman. Completely different! Oh, wait...

During the opening moments of the film, New Orleans cop Danny Fisher (Cena) captures Miles Jackson (Aidan Gillen) - a notorious terrorist and arms dealer. In the process, however, Jackson's girlfriend is killed. One year later, the criminal mastermind escapes from prison with plans to enact his revenge, taunting Danny with a series of twelve challenges which the policeman must successfully complete in order to secure the safe release of his girlfriend (Ashley Scott).

Designed to keep your pulse rate pounding non-stop, this action-packed thrill-ride contains a plot best described as a chess game on speed. With the reliable Renny Harlin at the helm, you should know precisely what you're in for. Harlin delivers an onslaught of booming stunts as well as a watchable protagonist with everyman qualities (ala Die Hard). 12 Rounds makes no apologies about the type of film it is. Rather than attempting to integrate a surplus of exposition, the plot throttles forward at breakneck speed, introducing familiar genre archetypes such as partners, cops, and pain-in-the-ass FBI interference. This is also a stunt-happy picture, and it's refreshing to witness practical effects as opposed to the modern CG-enhanced approach. Structured litigiously like Die Hard: With a Vengeance, Harlin's 12 Rounds rarely stops to breathe and is forever on the hunt for a dilapidated New Orleans location to blow up or to find another way for Danny to evade assured doom.

The titular rounds permit director Harlin the opportunity to concoct a number of compelling action set-pieces, some of which are slightly marred by the frenetic camerawork, the bland dialogue, and the wooden acting. The action usually involves chases and general destruction as Danny attempts to quickly travel from location to location or stop a reckless vehicle. With all the non-stop mayhem, this is the perfect video game movie. As 12 Rounds is an action flick of this current cinematic era, the editing is hyperactive and the camera is pretty shaky. Fortunately and surprisingly, however, Harlin is skilled enough to ensure the cinematography isn't overly distracting. Harlin's direction is extremely slick as well - so slick that the film hurtles between action sequences with boundless energy. Frankly, this is more or less an extended trailer.

12 Rounds sorely lacks intensity, however. The screenplay is overflowing with clichés and cheesy dialogue. It's also predictable from the word 'go'! 12 Rounds is competently shot and edited, but every time Danny's life is in danger it's obvious he'll live through it. The intensity is severely lessened by the docile PG-13 rating in particular. In the Die Hard movies, John McClane (the protagonist) ends up being covered in blood, cuts and bruises during every adventure, not to mention each challenge he faces is nail-biting. In 12 Rounds, Danny faces surprisingly mundane challenges. For amplified intensity the film needed profanity and intense dialogue, of which it has practically none in its current state (everyone seems a tad too calm, delivering flat dialogue). The PG-13 rating also robs the movie of the opportunity to keep an audience entertained with some good old-fashioned exploitation. 12 Rounds is too generic, and because it's a clear hodgepodge of bygone action films it's tough to fully enjoy it despite the fun action set-pieces.

Predictably, this WWE-produced John Cena actioner is incredibly stupid. It's not as bad as The Marine on this front, but there are massive problems with the film's believability. As Danny's set of challenges begin, his house is blown up. First of all, how could anyone plant explosives inside the man's house without anyone noticing? More importantly, a large amount of explosives within one's own home would be easy to spot!
Danny's indestructible tendencies become apparent when he rappels down a high-rise building and is eventually forced to jump, falling several metres onto wooden scaffolding which then collapses. But the man endures no broken bones or scratches. He's even unaffected after copping a bullet in the shoulder! On a bus at one stage a woman is wearing an explosive vest. Even though she's wearing clothes over this vest, it's glaringly obvious she's wearing it...but no-one notices. On this (full) bus it's also pretty silent, and Jackson talks to Danny about the explosive vest in a loud voice. Any bystanders with ears would be able to hear them. But there's no panic...apparently no-one hears them. Everything is normal. During the climax, there's a conveniently-placed swimming pool on the roof of a tall building right below a malfunctioning helicopter containing the hero who's in peril with his girlfriend. Such contrivances are difficult to digest. All things considered, 12 Rounds is a pretty moronic action film.

The film's intensity is further diminished by John Cena's charisma-free acting. His career as a wrestler for the WWE prepared him for roles in which he can take physical punishment, but his acting skills are not up to scratch for the rest of this Die Hard clone. His character's girlfriend has been kidnapped, yet Cena never seems too concerned about the whole situation as his facial expressions are hardly convincing. He's the Jean-Claude Van Damme of the PG-13 generation - an action hero with a bulky physique who's let down by poor vocal authority and the inability to convincingly act. Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson lit up the screen with unbelievable chemistry and explosive intensity in Die Hard: With a Vengeance, whereas Cena and those around him are just too dreary. To the wrestler's credit, however, he does remain watchable.
Gillen tries his best to channel Hans Gruber from Die Hard, and the results are somewhat underwhelming. His role of Miles Jackson isn't particularly frightening with messy hair, a wispy beard and a very plain outfit...he's more of a coffeehouse folk singer than a criminal mastermind. And Ashley Scott as Danny's girlfriend is more of a function in this story rather than a flesh-and-blood character.

Back in the early 1990s, 12 Rounds would've been a top-notch, R-rated action movie featuring someone like Bruce Willis or Sylvester Stallone. In 2009, however, this is just a PG-13 rehash of every action movie of the last decade starring a pseudo action hero. It's pretty much a mosaic of every customary '90s action movie plot element. Smooth-talking Eurotrash villain? Check. Cat-and-mouse game? Check. Kidnapped love interest? Check. Hero precariously hanging off of various vehicles? Check. If you can cope with the shaky camera work, the rapid editing and its derivative nature, 12 Rounds is an entertaining, chest-thumping thrill-ride, particularly if the side of your brain that does all the thinking craves a rest.

5.2/10

Yet another classic horror franchise is resurrected and rebooted by Platinum Dunes (Michael Bay's production company) with 2009's Friday the 13th. Not really a remake, and by no means an actual sequel, this particular addition to the Friday the 13th saga is more or less a mash-up of the first few films in the blood-soaked franchise - a "greatest hits" compilation, if you will. For die-hard fans of the series, this new movie is ideal - it unapologetically delivers the proverbial blood and gore as well as the breasts and the beautiful women. In comparison to the early Friday the 13th movies, this 2009 re-imagining is also slick and well-produced. Gore effects are captured with a great deal of filmmaking skill, the pace is fast, and (as long as you absorb the on-screen material without contemplating it too much) it's definitely fun. However other cinematic reboots (Batman Begins, Star Trek) introduced some innovation to their respective franchises. Friday the 13th, on the other hand, is well-made but has absolutely nothing fresh or exciting to add to the series. To be fair, though, any actual invention could risk alienating original fans. Nevertheless, straightforward rehashing grows stale, especially since slasher enthusiasts will be able to predict every beat. As the film haphazardly doles out cliché after cliché, it gets a tad tiresome.

It'd be redundant to outline the plot. This is Friday the 13th, after all. But for those unaware of the standard formula: a bunch of horny young adults travel to Camp Crystal Lake for the weekend and encounter Jason Voorhees (Mears) who carves them apart one by one. Oh, and a last-minute scare moment is thrown in just prior to the end credits. And voila - there's your Jason slasher flick.

Friday the 13th opens with a bang - a high-energy prologue that compresses the mythology of Jason Voorhees into a few short minutes. Recapping the events of the first film takes no more than five minutes as a viewer is clued into how Jason has grown into a bloodthirsty creature of legend. Once the film accepts the events of the 1980 original as its back-story, it embarks upon a new course. Following this opening, Jason offs a group of knife-fodder in a sequence which establishes the character's abilities (leading to a series of thrilling, gory kills). The film subsequently settles down before adhering to the time-worn Friday the 13th structure. Had the rest of the picture sustained the quality of the rousing prologue, there'd be far more to recommend. Alas, the central narrative is a mess. The clichés are also firmly in place, the characters do stupid things which lead to their inevitable demise, and there's no mystery as to who'll survive until the final act.

There's plenty of bloodletting, yes, but an effective slasher should work on another, slightly higher level. The best slasher flicks are able to generate a level of almost unbearable tension (think Scream or Halloween), but within Friday the 13th there's little tension (although the opening sequence is suspenseful and the climax is admittedly quite nail-biting). Character identification is a requirement when it comes to generating effective tension...all the characters in this production are one-note caricatures lined up for the slaughter. There's the token black guy, an Asian stoner, a few pairs of large breasts (there's a lot of skin in this film), an asshole who's guaranteed to get killed...it's all agonisingly by-the-numbers. Director Marcus Nispel (who directed the 2003 remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre) and the screenwriters (Damian Shannon and Mark Swift, who also penned Freddy vs. Jason) pack this feature with too many clichés. With lights being knocked out, cell phones dying, cars that won't start and characters running off in separate directions, it's all quite hopeless. The days during which filmmakers spent time and effort on a horror movie screenplay have passed.

The backdrop for this reboot isn't Manhattan or Hell or the furthest reaches of outer space. Jason is instead back at Camp Crystal Lake, and he's killing people because they're invading his territory (First Blood, the first Rambo movie, was apparently inspiration here). Unsurprisingly, Friday the 13th ignores logic. How could anybody live in the old Camp Crystal Lake campground undetected for decades? How does Jason manage to dig an extensive labyrinth of tunnels under the old camp without anybody noticing? Why haven't the police caught on yet with so many people going missing in the area? As always, Jason also has the uncanny ability to be everywhere at once. Aside from these nitpickings, the new and improved Jason is one aspect the film gets right. He's fast, agile, shows vulnerability from time to time and appears to be smarter. Derek Mears has a strong screen presence as Jason Voorhees, and there are plenty of opportunities for him to rush teens with his machete raised. Plenty of classic '80s-style lurking is included for good measure as well. On top of this, some of the kills are pretty killer (excuse the pun). They're technically proficient and fairly creative, although there's nothing here that rivals the cleverness of the 1980 original. Interestingly, the less elaborate kills are usually the most satisfying (like a screwdriver through the head). Nispel is skilled at building an atmosphere of dread, even if the payoffs are fairly pedestrian - the kills are more gory than genuinely scary.

Naturally, the actors are all very attractive and every performance is standard stuff. Jared Padalecki, Danielle Panabaker and Amanda Righetti are the trademark heroes, but the trio aren't anything overly special. The only real standout is Aaron Yoo, who delivers a few mildly amusing one-liners even in the face of danger. Julianna Guill is certainly memorable...but she only distinguishes herself from the other actresses on account of her sensual dancing and a sequence in which she bares her "stupendous" breasts (as one character describes them).

Only the adequate performances and the competent gore effects demonstrate improvement over the earlier Friday the 13th films. Sadly, both of these factors are wasted on a story not worth telling and a movie not really worth making. This new Friday the 13th is derivative and sorely lacks novelty, but at least it reiterates the old material with top-notch production values and an awesome soundtrack. There are certainly worse slasher movies than this Friday the 13th re-imagining, but it nonetheless remains forgettable, disposable and unnecessary. It's gruesome, exploitative, watchable fun, but we've seen it all before.

4.7/10

Every frame of director Gabriele Muccino's Seven Pounds feels manipulatively engineered for one purpose: tear-jerking. On an emotional level, one could decree that this motion picture is satisfying as it indeed contains powerful moments. Yet on an intellectual level, the film is disappointingly shallow as it shamelessly defies logic with ridiculous plot contrivances and unconvincing character behaviour. Seven Pounds is a strange little movie - it's part romance fable, part maudlin study in grief and part puzzle, and it visibly hopes to grab the attention of the Oscar committee. The film is intended to be somewhat depressing in order to move on an emotional level, but as a result of the deliberate pacing and the hollow core (seriously, what was the point of the movie?) it's ultimately a depressing, notoriously unenjoyable cinematic snooze-fest. Seven Pounds suffers from being too earnest and sentimental as well as overdone and grim...even when it's supposed to lift our spirits. As a love story it's substandard and as a redemption story it's pretty ridiculous.

The basic story of Seven Pounds, beyond the narrative shuffle and existential pondering, is fairly interesting. But not much of this plotline can be revealed because the movie has been foolishly designed to make the most fundamental plot point a spoiler! At its most rudimentary level, the story concerns IRS agent Ben Thomas (Smith) who sets out to help the lives of seven strangers in a journey of personal redemption. Flashbacks gradually reveal why Ben has become so bizarre and solitary, and divulge the true nature of Ben's mission. But all the narrative trickery and emotional manipulation only place Ben further out of the audience's reach as he moves through the plot like an indomitable Terminator devoid of palpable motivations. Seven Pounds is not easy to predict, but the ambiguity of Ben's quest erodes the effectiveness of the overall experience as Ben's enigmatic misery and unclear motivations trigger head-slapping frustration. Eventually the story grows stale and is unable to generate sufficient intrigue as the film progresses. With Ben's motives left in the dark until the end, not everyone will have the patience to stick with the film to learn the answer to its riddle.

Seven Pounds conveys its story in a non-linear and seemingly haphazard manner, confounding and confusing as a means to conceal the "twist" until the final act. Unfortunately, the filmmakers miss their mark - anyone with a brain will be able to decipher the film's final trajectory within the first thirty minutes (particularly because the movie commences with one of the last scenes). Probably the biggest problem is that it's impossible to easily accept Ben's behaviour. Guilt may be a powerful motivator and the quest for redemption can be obsessive, but Ben should pursue his objectives with more believable human behaviour patterns. As it is, his behaviour is downright silly (similar to a lot of the film's contrived proceedings).

By any standard, Ben Thomas is not a nice person. He invades the private lives of critically ill people and collects their personal information under false pretences. Ben runs little con games on these people before judging them, and this is both intrusive and morally dubious. On top of this, his unexpected relationship with Emily is dishonest - he refuses to divulge any information about himself. Seven Pounds also ignores the fact that meddling with the lives of strangers incurs responsibilities. At one point Ben gives his expensive beach house to an abused woman (Carillo) and her young children as a gesture of charity. Ben chooses this beneficiary on the basis of a few endorsements and a brief, unproductive meeting. It may seem like a nice gesture, but this would be doing more harm than good - the woman has no way of paying the taxes on the house, nor will she have money for the house's upkeep. She'll likely run into hassles with suspicious neighbours, lawyers, and perhaps even Ben's family. Chances are the house will be taken away from her, and Ben's gesture will be in vain. On top of this, in a symbolic, stupid subplot, Ben somehow acquires a box jellyfish (!) that lives in a tank filled with tap water (!!) until it's required for its intended purpose.

Here's the unforgivable problem: Ben forces his help on people without their consent or even their knowledge. He gives some of these people gifts that would be morally unacceptable under normal circumstances. Ben's selfless altruism is conceived on the basis of simple math: if you break seven bottles, you must replace the seven bottles. This is, of course, utter simplistic nonsense. One should act out of moral commitment as opposed to some crazy notion of guilt. But more importantly, the "terrible event" that haunts Ben's past was an accident. He was careless, yes, but no more culpable than any other person who does something foolish. Seven Pounds wraps up with a heart-wrenching (or at least they're supposed to be) series of overly mawkish soap-opera epiphanies. The last moment of the film, during which two people are seemingly drawn together by Ben's acts, is extremely tacky - sentimentally flawed and ethically questionable. Unfortunately, the first half of the movie hasn't earned the investment required for a big emotional finish as it's far too boring, and the ending falls flat.

This is Will Smith's second collaboration with director Gabriele Muccino (the brilliant Pursuit of Happyness being their first) who continually plies heavily dramatic performances from the actor who's famous for featuring in comedic roles. Smith is an accessible and likeable performer, but his charisma seems somewhat forced here...and he looks more constipated than tortured from time to time. Rosario Dawson, playing alongside Will Smith, is fairly credible and natural. But Dawson's character, a terminally ill yet full-of-life patient, is familiar in the cinematic realm of tear-jerkers, and it's hard to find something new to engage with. Woody Harrelson is given a small but crucial role here, and he's fairly memorable. Also look out for Barry Pepper who makes the most of his restricted screen-time.

Muccino and screenwriter Grant Nieporte clearly strived to create an uplifting motion picture, but in the long run Seven Pounds is uncomfortable and depressing. Although initially involving, the story's big reveal occurs too late, and even the most determined viewer will have trouble maintaining interest. Seven Pounds is more exasperating than riveting. While it's refreshing to behold a star vehicle that demands patience and attention, even an extremely enjoyable film needs to be succinct. Seven Pounds is an exercise in self-indulgence - it's a collage of melodramatic scenes (emotion is amplified by intrusive music during these scenes as well) followed by an ending that fails to deliver a big emotional payoff.

3.8/10

A reboot in a similar vein to Casino Royale and Batman Begins, J.J. Abrams' Star Trek represents a dynamic resurrection of the iconic franchise of the same name. To effectively revivify the series, this Star Trek is a new beginning, starting the timeline from scratch and introducing fresh faces on both sides of the camera. To the credit of Abrams and his crew, they manage to achieve the impossible, creating a blistering science fiction action-adventure that should retain long-time Trekkies while simultaneously making the Trek universe accessible to a new generation of movie-goers. Although the film suffers from average-at-best scripting, Abrams's visual treatment of the flick is glorious, making this one of the most handsome and involving blockbusters of the 2009 summer season.

A young rebel whose heroic father died aboard the U.S.S. Kelvin, James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) spends his time indulging in booze and getting into trouble. But Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) senses great leadership qualities in Kirk, encouraging him to enlist in Starfleet to fulfil his potential. Kirk follows through and heads to Starfleet Academy, where he meets medical officer "Bones" McCoy (Karl Urban) and embittered science officer Spock (Zachary Quinto), among others. A threat soon emerges in the form of rogue Romulan Captain Nero (Eric Bana), who threatens peaceful planets with a doomsday device. A crew assembles onboard the newly christened U.S.S. Enterprise for protection, and Kirk is forced to assume a leadership role to find a way to defeat the enemy.

Star Trek is held back from excellence by its mediocre screenplay, penned by Transformers writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. Several narrative elements are actually reminiscent of Top Gun for whatever reason, and it's too "cute" for all the requisite characters to meet through a series of increasingly unbelievable coincidences. Added to this, the plot is a total mess, requiring a substantial amount of exposition to keep it barely comprehensible. Moreover, the plot is hindered by the constraints of the "origin story" format; the bigger picture of the narrative plays second fiddle to these characters meeting, which seems unnecessary. Did we really need to see Kirk's first meeting with Uhura (Zoe Saldana) in a bar when he tries to flirt? It is also bothersome that Kirk rises from cadet to captain in such an expedited fashion. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of Star Trek is that it's hardly a cerebral blockbuster. The Gene Roddenberry years were more high-minded, whereas Abrams's film is less sophisticated. Another gaping flaw is the lack of peril and edge-of-your-seat tension - there is never a sense that the crew are actually in danger, probably because Nero's plans are too vague.

Fortunately, Star Trek succeeds because of Abrams's direction, and the competent filmmaking in practically every aspect. The pace is mercifully brisk, and the film barely feels its two-hour length as it works through the eye candy and character interaction. Abrams expertly orchestrates multiple space battles, chases, shootouts, and all the other staples one expects from a blockbuster, and it's all hugely exhilarating in Abrams's hands. Plus, Star Trek has never looked better. Although prior Trek pictures suffer from budgetary constraints, this is no longer an issue. With a blockbuster budget at Abrams's disposal, the special effects are spectacular, with borderline photorealistic CGI. There are a number of expansive interior sets as well, which give the picture a lived-in feeling. Michael Giacchino's score is also suitably zippy, melancholy and grand, perfectly complementing the visuals. The heroic main theme is very memorable indeed. However, Abrams relies too much on lens flares and hyper-polished photography at times, which can be obnoxious to the point of distraction.

Although Star Trek is an action-oriented blockbuster, Abrams and his writers properly establish the ensemble before sending the characters into action. As a result, you will never mistake Bones for some interchangeable supporting character. The franchise's heart and soul is the duo of Kirk and Spock, and this Star Trek excels in the casting of Pine and Quinto. For both actors, this is their first big movie, yet their inexperience is not apparent - they are engaging and natural. Pine did not set out to mimic William Shatner, instead embodying the essence of Kirk's character, combining charm, cocky arrogance and welcome humanity. Quinto is even better - his thoughtful performance effortlessly conveys the dichotomy that makes Spock such a fascinating character: his frustratingly logical surface persona concealing a barely suppressed well of emotion. Abrams fortunately allots ample time for Kirk and Spock to engage in verbal battles, and we get to watch as they build their friendship with a glue of muted aggravation and burgeoning respect.

An interesting angle of Star Trek is that it's not strictly a reboot - it exists in the same continuity as the original movies and the television show. See, a time travel angle is built into the plot, establishing an alternate universe that merely sets the Enterprise crew on a new path. To solidify this, Leonard Nimoy cameos as an aging Mr. Spock, known as Spock Prime. It's a treat for Trekkies to see Nimoy back in his iconic role, and it's even better that Nimoy still commands the screen whenever he appears. Fortunately, the supporting cast is just as good, with Simon Pegg and Anton Yelchin most notable as Scotty and Chekov, respectively. Other actors include Bruce Greenwood, John Cho, Winona Ryder and Chris Hemsworth, all of whom hit their marks. Bana is an underwhelming villain, though.

To be fair, Star Trek has never been great from the first movie. After all, Star Trek: The Motion Picture is often regarded as dated, stilted and underwhelming; it wasn't until The Wrath of Khan that the series took off. Ultimately, Star Trek leaves us with the sense that this is merely a good beginning for what can become greatness. Nevertheless, it's still a fun time, and it is worth watching for its best moments.

7.1/10