Reviews by PvtCaboose91

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

In the simplest of terms, The Hangover is flat-out hilarious and thoroughly entertaining. Directed by Todd Phillips (Old School, School for Scoundrels), this above-average comedy is endowed with a premise bursting with comedic possibilities...and just about every single one of these possibilities is exploited in highly hysterical and satisfying ways. With a brisk runtime of less than 100 minutes, The Hangover is furiously-paced and teeming with gags, and none of these gags are unnecessarily drawn out. In an age of overstuffed, excessively vulgar comedies, this flick is a breath of fresh air - a reassuring mixture of genuine wit and shrewd laughs within side-splitting vignettes. Yet this is also a skilful picture, blessed with an ingeniously-constructed narrative that manages to keep an audience engaged while taking full advantage of the gifted cast and their individual comedic mojo. Shot in fifteen days on a modest $35 million budget, The Hangover is one of 2009's best comedies, and the unexpected commercial success affirms this sentiment.

The Hangover centres on a group of four friends. Doug (Bartha) is due to be married in a few days, and travels to Las Vegas with his groomsmen for his bachelor party. Unfortunately, the night does not go according to plan...
Following a short set-up, the action commences when the trio of extremely hungover groomsmen wake up in the apocalyptic wreckage of their highly expensive hotel suite. There's a tiger in the bathroom, an abandoned baby in the closet, and a chicken on the loose. They have absolutely no memory of what happened during the night...and Doug, whose wedding is in 24 hours, is inexplicably missing. After this point, the film transforms into a twisted, unbelievably hilarious detective story as the three hapless men attempt to piece together the events of the previous evening, track down the missing groom, and get to the church on time.

On its surface, The Hangover doesn't seem overly brilliant or original since the "bachelor party gone wrong" scenario is a well-established comedy subgenre. However, a majority of the clichés are astutely avoided, mainly because the movie begins where most comedies of this ilk finish: in the aftermath of the crazy party. Skipping the gratuitous party scenes is not just clever, but it's also an intrinsic aspect of the narrative since (thanks to a self-administered drug that turns out to be Rohypnol - the date rape drug) the main characters are as oblivious to the events of the previous night as we are. Exhibiting an ingenuity one wouldn't expect from the guys also responsible for Four Christmases and Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, screenwriters Jon Lucas and Scott Moore supply one hilarious pay-off after another as the protagonists frantically scramble to retrace their steps in order to reconnect with the misplaced groom. This central mystery, and the genuine concern the guys harbour for the well-being of their friend, provides the film with an excellent, frenzied momentum.

Discovering evidence to suggest what random (and somewhat disconcerting) events occurred during the previous night generates a lot of the comedy (such evidence includes a used condom, a police car, etc). Hysterical vignettes (such as those featuring the hilarious Ken Jeong) and incredibly witty dialogue constitute a lot of the humour as well. There are also amusing references to Rain Man and A Beautiful Mind, but they aren't as funny as the inclusion of the clichéd notion that there's nothing as hilarious as a pratfall by a fat man. Most commendably, The Hangover is the furthest thing from a Judd Apatow-style comedy (the style which appears to be a popular trend in contemporary Hollywood). There is profanity and crude humour in this unapologetically R-rated laugh-fest, but there's more of an assortment of gags...the makers don't rely solely on vulgarity. Heart is not sacrificed in the pursuit of laughs as the film manages to include plenty of the former and a super-abundance of the latter.

One of the only real failings of The Hangover is that there are one or two lulls during which the laughs aren't as frequent. And the characters finally realise where Doug has ended up on account of a play on words during a random dialogue exchange. This is way too easy, as if the writers were seeking a quick, lazy way to proceed into the final act. Thankfully, however, the concluding act is loaded with comedic energy, culminating in a series of photographs guaranteed to have audiences howling riotously throughout the end credits. The Hangover does occasionally lack originality, and the ending is pretty conventional...but the conventions are a given. And who really cares when the clichés can generate a movie this infinitely enjoyable?

It's especially refreshing to behold a legitimately hilarious movie that's free of most Judd Apatow regulars (Paul Rudd, Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill, and so on).
The comedic trio of actors taking centre stage in The Hangover are impeccable. Bradley Cooper plays the likable leader of the pack. He generally avoids the "asshole" vibe given off by characters in similar films, thus making Phil an extremely appealing individual. Beside him, Ed Helms and Zach Galifianakis deliver excellent performances, coming across as completely natural while conveying the quirky mannerisms of their characters. While Helms is highly amusing, Galifianakis is the scene-stealer here as the socially awkward Alan who asks inane questions like "Did Caesar really live here?" as the gang check into Caesar's Palace. Galifianakis is an utter riot, whose one-liners and facial expressions are constantly hilarious. And as the missing groom the trio are searching for, Justin Bartha is terrific.
The Hangover is of course populated with plenty of other weirdos...and each new person the boys encounter is weirder than the one before them. Heather Graham (in career-resuscitating mode) stars as a hooker while Mike Tyson briefly appears as himself. The always-endearing Jeffrey Tambor also delivers a few amusing lines. Out of the supporting cast, Ken Jeong is the most hilarious and quotable as a Chinese gangster.

Quite frankly, the less written about The Hangover the better. This is a movie that needs to be experienced, not spoiled. It's best valued as an extended surprise, with the hilarity significantly enhanced by an atmosphere of the unexpected. Every once in a while, one needs to just sit back and enjoy an effortlessly hilarious film. The Hangover is the right film for the job and it's destined to become a cult comedy classic. You'll be laughing about it for weeks.

8.4/10

Prior to helming The Spirit, a screen adaptation of Will Eisner's comic book series, Frank Miller had scripted the woeful RoboCop III and had co-directed the extraordinary Sin City (with Robert Rodriguez). Merely a few minutes into The Spirit, it's agonisingly clear who the real cinematic talent behind Sin City was. Miller (himself a legend in the realm of graphic novels) directs solo for the first time for The Spirit, and the product is this definitive showcase of what can go wrong if a comic book artist seizes the reigns of a celluloid production. For Miller's directorial debut, the sense of visual style becomes so pervasive that it overwhelms everything else, especially (and most detrimentally) plot. Alas, the eye candy grows stale and repetitive, unlike Sin City which coupled the mind-blowing visuals with engaging, fast-paced stories. The visuals cannot be faulted in their execution, but there's little holding the film together - The Spirit is just pretty pictures connected with tin-eared dialogue and cardboard characters. Frank Miller deserves credit for being a comic book visionary, but - to quote Dirty Harry - a man's got to know his limitations. Due to the quality of this tosh, Miller may not direct a major studio film on his own ever again. The Spirit is a mess - it's hollow, directionless and self-indulgent. It seems that in order to keep a film tightly-plotted and well-paced, Miller needs a guiding hand.

The story takes place in the dreary, crime-riddled Central City. Denny Colt (Macht) was one of the metropolis' finest cops until he was killed in the line of duty before being reborn as the enigmatic masked avenger known as The Spirit. He's seemingly indestructible as his body regenerates upon sustaining injury, but the same is also true of his nemesis The Octopus (Jackson). The Octopus aims to wipe out The Spirit's beloved Central City while he also pursues the blood of Heracles which will make him immortal. Caught up in this battle is sultry jewel thief Sand Saref (Mendes) who shares a past with Denny Colt.

The Spirit simply has no idea what it wishes to be as it erratically veers across the tonal spectrum. Part neo-noir, part acid trip and part black comedy, this feature is like Dick Tracy, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, The Phantom, and the '60s Batman TV series rolled into one...but minus their respective charms. Goofy slapstick punctuates the action, and the gorgeous CGI-augmented visuals (which evoke Sin City) are at odds with the awful campy approach. Samuel L. Jackson as The Octopus wields a large pipe-wrench, traps The Spirit in a toilet (complete with a lame one-liner) and melts a cat down to a couple of eyeballs. There's a scene featuring Jackson and Scarlett Johansson dressed as Nazis - for absolutely no reason - that drags on for ten minutes straight, and The Octopus hates eggs. The guns resemble something out of the Looney Tunes as well! This is also a PG-13 film, meaning intense violence is out. If Miller had crafted either a hard-edged Sin City-esque noir or a straight-up campy parody, then The Spirit might've worked. As it is, this nonsense fails as a film noir, a comic book movie, and as a dark comedy.

In cinematically adapting Will Eisner's acclaimed comic book series, director Miller has opted to employ techniques similar to those that were used so effectively in Sin City - i.e. the majority of the film was shot in front of a green screen. By working with a digital set, Miller is able to craft a motion picture that looks almost identical to its comic book equivalent (even occasionally copying specific shots from the comic). There's a lot of computer generated imagery and animation here, with silhouettes and shadows playing a big part in the visual palette. The digital format suits the source material, allowing the filmmakers to combine the fantastical with gritty hyper-realism. However, the green screen noir visuals no longer sparkle as much as they did in Sin City; feeling imitative as opposed to innovative. It seems Miller is so focused on bloating his flick with one-note characters and stabs at slapstick that he neglects story and pacing. Consequently, there's no sense of forward momentum. The overacting, the bland story and Miller's tepid direction prevent pulses from speeding up as well. The visuals are impressive, but there's just no story to serve them. Scenes just happen, often with no clear beginning or end.

The dialogue is utterly atrocious, the acting is embarrassing, and the drama is corny to the point of laugh-inducing. And this kills any element of suspense or tension. There's a certain artistry in crafting crime dialogue, and Frank Miller has shown he can successfully pull off such dialogue as his Sin City graphic novels are perfect examples of the form. However, Miller's gifts aren't palpable while watching The Spirit. Lines such as "My city screams. She is my lover and I am her spirit" are delivered with gusto but sound awful. Admittedly, some of the levity is in place on purpose, but Samuel L. Jackson's over-the-top monologues probably aren't meant to be worthy of chortles. The Octopus is not sinister...he's silly! As for The Spirit...he's far too dull and personality-deficient to be able to hold together an entire movie. He's easily the least interesting of all the main characters, unfortunately. Miller uses roof-running as a substitute for action, and the film misses much of the quirky charm and humanity of the Will Eisner comic book series. Ultimately, this grossly mishandled adaptation lacks emotion and is hollow at its core. It's just plain boring.

The Spirit is a movie without a direction, a vision, or a definitive path - it's all over the place! Frank Miller is even unable to commit to a time period to set the film in. Characters look and dress as if they're living in the 1940s, and talk as if this is a Double Indemnity parody. They also drive classic automobiles straight out of the 40s. In addition, women run their own hospitals and perform complicated surgical procedures. Every office has a Xerox machine, ostensibly in order for Miller to concoct a scene in which Eva Mendes photocopies her rear end (bear in mind the Xerox machine wasn't invented until the 60s, conflicting with the 40s atmosphere). This eventually leads to a cheesy double entendre.

Gabriel Macht's performance, much like the film's tone, is all over the map. The blame should lay with the director rather than the actor in this case, though. He's a dark avenger one moment, a snappy-talking noir character the next. And he's always - always - monologuing! Miller aimed to bring all the comic book thought-balloons to life using constant monologues, but it gets very tired very fast. And as for Samuel L. Jackson playing The Octopus...he has never been hammier. At the other end of the spectrum are the femme fatales, all of which are attractive but vapidly performed. There's an almost unrecognisable Scarlett Johansson as The Octopus's number one henchman, and Eva Mendes as a bad girl obsessed with shiny things.

2008 was an above-average year for comic book movies (Iron Man, The Dark Knight) until The Spirit reared its ugly head. The critics had a right to pound this one into the ground. While Miller's directorial debut is watchable on account of a few rousing scenes (the initial five minutes foster the false impression that greatness will ensue) and technical competency, the negatives far outweigh the positives. Miller simply lacks the chops as a filmmaker to handle a motion picture on his own. The Spirit is indefensible; a ridiculous mishmash of random, disconnected scenes and boring speeches. The action lacks excitement, the humour is too campy, and the drama is half-baked. Stick with Sin City.

4.2/10

A botched, superfluous modernisation of Robert Wise's timeless science fiction gem of the same name, The Day the Earth Stood Still is an overdone and super-sized special effects extravaganza as well as a prime example of cinematic blasphemy. Instead of the 1950s mindset which pervaded the original feature (Cold War, fear of aliens, fear of nuclear attack), this remake has been resettled into a 21st century mindset (concentrating on environmental issues), and the result is a blockbuster poorly masquerading as an important "message" film. In the end it's extremely familiar, not just due to its nature as a remake but also because it's a fundamental duplicate of every global disaster/alien epic from the past decade (from Independence Day to The Day After Tomorrow to Deep Impact). The Day the Earth Stood Still is a CGI-laden retread chock full of clichés and stock characters (government officials, frazzled scientists, a kid etc.). Both the director (Scott Derrickson) and the main star (Keanu Reeves) of this remake are self-proclaimed fans of the 1951 original, but their collaboration is utterly soulless. Worse, The Day the Earth Stood Still lacks the simplicity, elegance and intelligence of the earlier film, employing special effects and pointless action scenes to replace passages of dialogue.

Following barely a few minutes of generic character development, Astrobiologist Helen Benson (Connelly) is abruptly plucked from her everyday life when the American Government summons a group of scientists for a top-secret matter. As it turns out, an object from outer space is on a collision course with Earth and the point of impact is projected to be Central Park in Manhattan. The object turns out to be a massive glowing sphere, and from it emerges an alien ambassador named Klaatu (Reeves) who assumes human form to communicate with the citizens of Earth. Klaatu is interrogated by United States Government officials, and he reveals that he has an important message for the planet but will only speak to the United Nations. He is denied of this, however, and goes on the run with Helen and her stepson (Smith) as the fate of the planet gradually becomes clear.

The Day the Earth Stood Still opens in 1928 and attempts to establish some back-story that was absent from the original movie. During this opening sequence, a nameless character portrayed by Keanu Reeves is shown on an expedition on a blizzard-infested mountain in India and stumbles upon a glowing sphere. This scene ostensibly serves the purpose of explaining how Klaatu looks a lot like Reeves in his human form. You see, apparently modern audiences are unable to use their imagination to figure out why an alien would resemble a human. But not knowing Klaatu's origins in the 1951 movie generated an effective, intriguing mystery. On top of this, the landing of the sphere in Central Park in this remake lacks the emotional charge as well as the jaw-dropping nature that Wise captured so excellently all those decades earlier. In the original film, there was a far greater feeling of confusion and excitement during Klaatu's arrival, but this is hopelessly lost here as Hollywood excess is in full display, showing the re-imagined Gort emerging from the glowing sphere. Neither the sphere nor the larger Gort are as impressive as their simplistic counterparts from over fifty years ago. Most disappointingly, The Day the Earth Stood Still lacks unique, defining imagery.

After a strong, fast-paced beginning (albeit with zero characterisation), the flick veers off course throughout its second half with clichéd "character building" sequences, pointless pyrotechnics, and a lot of running around in the backwoods of New Jersey. Klaatu is given inane abilities, such as being able to interfere with technology and the ability to revive dead people. As the film draws to a close, clichés are in abundance. The ending is also extremely rushed and unsatisfying, as well as lacking the ominous and downbeat warning of its predecessor. Another of its major crimes is displaying nations using stereotypes. The film is ambitious in scale, unsuccessful in execution. Australia is shown briefly, for instance...the postcard-style image depicts a couple overlooking the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the Sydney Opera House. London also looks as if it's stuck in the '50s! Egypt and Middle-Eastern countries are shown as primitive civilisations who ride camels. In addition, the main action taking place in New York is an inexcusable cliché. It's as if Roland Emmerich directed the flick!

The original film offered an anti-war message - the human race needed to be eliminated in the flick because advanced weaponry posed a threat to alien worlds. Back in 1951, a handful of years after World War II, the message was timely. In 2008, global warming has become a major issue and it's addressed in this remake. Klaatu states his case for genocide: Earth is too valuable to allow its indigenous human population to destroy it, and therefore humans must be eliminated. The Day the Earth Stood Still conveys the message that humans are destroying Earth with industrialisation, cars and our thirst for electricity, but these messages are merely a plot device. Frustratingly, The Day the Earth Stood Still could be successfully updated to suit contemporary issues, but, with the story traded in for special effects, this remake is just an uninspired mockery of Robert Wise's original film. What a wasted opportunity!

The Day the Earth Stood Still is technically proficient with some terrific special effects, fantastic cinematography, and a pulse-pounding score. But all of the Hollywood magic on display cannot hide the fact that the entire film lacks soul and fails to engage on an emotional level. The effects themselves are hit-and-miss, mind you. The giant alien spheres are stunning to behold, and the large swarms of bugs are spectacular, but most of the effects integrated with the real actors look quite weak. Anything involving Gort looks absurd, and he's the film's least convincing visual element. Most of the big "money shots" (there are a lot) were used in the trailers as well, so you won't be missing much if you skip the movie. Surprisingly, Peter Jackson's Weta Workshop worked on the project. It's a shame that this is one of their most subpar efforts.

The film works better when it focuses on the drama involving the protagonists as this is when a viewer feels most engaged. Unfortunately, though, once Klaatu changes his view on humankind's potential to transform itself, it's unconvincingly motivated and it seems like the aliens didn't even do their homework before deciding to eliminate the human race.

The famous quote from the original Day the Earth Stood Still - "Klaatu barada nicto" - has become a cult sci-fi phrase over the years, held in the same esteem as "May the Force be with you" (from Star Wars) and "Live long and prosper" (from Star Trek). This remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still apparently contains these beloved words, but they're irritatingly inaudible.

Keanu Reeves is emotionless and wooden, as befitting a naïve humanoid alien not accustomed to a human body. Considering his impassive acting style, Reeves is a decent choice for the role of Klaatu, but his performance isn't anything special and lacks a requisite zing. Jennifer Connelly is merely serviceable in the fairly thankless role of Helen Benson. She's not memorable, and all the emotion she attempts to bring to the role barely registers. Jaden Smith (Will Smith's son) appears as a child who's a frequent source of irritation. Jaden's performance is fine, but his character is a stereotype - an infuriating stereotype as well. He starts out as the stepson of a woman he calls Helen, but by the end the two have bonded and he refers to his stepmother as "Mom". Along the way he's on hand to be a general pain in the arse. Veteran actress Kathy Bates also chews up a few scenes as the Secretary of Defense. John Cleese, however, makes the biggest impression, delivering the best performance in the film in what amounts to a mere cameo. Cleese's character presents an impassioned case to Klaatu, telling him why humankind should be given a second chance.

In order for a remake to be successful, it has to traverse a difficult path. It must honour the original while bringing something fresh, interesting and intelligent to the project. This remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still fails a little in both categories. The need to be a CGI spectacle trumps the desire to be smart and thought-provoking, and this is detrimental. In the end it feels too much like a generic disaster feature not unlike those released during the last ten years. The Day the Earth Stood Still is certainly entertaining and technically extraordinary with acceptable performances, but it simply fails to connect emotionally and it's too shoddy to ever be considered a classic in its own right.

4.5/10

From the outset, Fanboys wears its Star Wars fandom visibly on its sleeve, right down to a familiar opening scroll that's even prefaced with the title "A short time ago in a galaxy not so far, far away..." Immediately, it's obvious you're dealing with passionate fans, and that the experience to follow will be endearing, goofy and fun. Shot in 2006 before subsequently becoming the victim of a heated post-production war, Fanboys at long last rises out of Harvey Weinstein's dust-laden vault to satiate the devoted who hoped to one day enjoy this carousel of Star Wars references and male bonding humour. The makers of Fanboys aimed to provide a love letter to fanboys and fangirls worldwide - i.e. to those who devote themselves to an aspect of pop culture and often endure ridicule for their passion. Unfortunately, while this tribute to fandom has its moments of sheer brilliance, it is primarily a conventional road trip feature that doesn't manage to rise above the standard for typical entries to the tired genre. There's a selection of very funny moments and sly references, but it ultimately ends up feeling clichéd and shallow. In the hands of more adept storytellers, this could have been a far deeper, more thoughtful movie.

Fanboys is set in 1998, and the countdown to the highly anticipated release of Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace is intensifying. The story tracks a group of Ohio's biggest Star Wars fans - Eric (Huntington), Linus (Marquette), Hutch (Fogler) and Windows (Baruchel) - who live and breathe everything Star Wars and believe six months is too long to wait for the prequel. Three of these protagonists are also stuck in perpetual adolescence: they work in a comic book store, still live at home and are hopeless with the opposite sex. As for the fourth protagonist, he has grown up and works at his father's successful business. However an awkward reunion at a Halloween party reignites these old friendships. When it's revealed that Linus is dying of cancer and won't live long enough to witness the premiere of The Phantom Menace, the boys devise a plan to travel to the Skywalker Ranch in San Francisco where they'll break in and steal an unfinished copy of the much-anticipated flick...

See, since this is set before George Lucas released the dire prequels, these guys genuinely believe the new Star Wars film will be worth all the trouble...

It's fair to say that The Weinstein Company, who distributed Fanboys, treated the film abominably. It was originally due to be released in late 2007, but reshoots, re-edits, and marketing uncertainty forced the release date to shift multiple times before it was finally dumped into a small number of theatres in February 2009. Fanboys was beset with controversy because the Weinsteins re-edited the movie in order to eliminate the subplot about Linus being terminally ill. It'd be interesting to find out how close the film's theatrical cut is to director Kyle Newman's original vision, especially considering that Stephen Brill (the guy behind Without a Paddle) conducted the reshoots of which Newman took absolutely no part in.

As for the cancer subplot, it gives the plot momentum and it provides the characters with further motivation. However, the fact that it could be so easily excised indicates how little it is actually touched on. Linus never talks about his sickness, and he rarely even seems sick. His cancer is only mentioned at the beginning before resurfacing once the film begins to wind down. There's a lot of potential here that's never fully realised. Newman and the writers tread lightly around the subject of mortality and the real reason for this cross-country adventure. They instead maintain a light tone, keeping the focus on pop culture references as well as the wacky situations the characters become entangled in while on the road.

It's probably best to consider Fanboys an affectionate ode to the adventure of geekdom, and how pure the feeling of Star Wars idolatry was back in 1998 (before the Jedi nation was forever divided upon the release of The Phantom Menace). Fanboys plays out more or less as one would expect from a road trip picture. The characters interact, meet quite a number of strange people, and reach their destination only after some unexpected detours. Like most movies of this ilk, there are segments of the film that work better than others. One of the better scenes depicts Hutch taking a detour in order to go to Captain Kirk's Iowa hometown and harass some rabid Star Trek fans. In fact, the Star Wars vs. Star Trek war rages on throughout the course of Fanboys (fairly ironic in 2009, as the latter franchise just became cool again thanks to a big-budget revival). This particular subplot is the film's finest touch, permitting the two rival factions to slap each other around for a number of good laughs. The characters' final arrival at Skywalker Ranch - complete with ninja outfits, grappling hooks and Star Wars props galore - is a fitting finale that suits the movie's silly, warm-hearted tone.

Most of the characters are treated merely as caricatures, defined only by their obsession and complete inability to relate to anyone outside of their small, insular circle of fan-friends. Not to mention the film is also overflowing with clichés. The dialogue is admittedly quite flat at times, and the raunchiness is tame (due to the docile PG-13 rating). Fanboys could have used some Kevin Smith or Judd Apatow-style moments to increase the laugh quota and make it a tad more daring. The dialogue is even so clichéd that towards the end, after their quest is over, Linus explains "It was never about the movie..." How's that for subtlety?

The filmmakers certainly do an excellent job of honouring fandom. The extensive list of cameos is very impressive, and there are endless Star Wars references. In terms of cameos, there's Danny Trejo, Kevin Smith, Jason Mewes, Danny McBride, Ethan Suplee and even William Shatner (whose appearance is hysterical). Seth Rogen even appears, playing not one but three roles: a bucktoothed Trekkie, a Trek conventioneer dressed as a monster, and (most hilariously) a Las Vegas pimp! Amazing, Rogen steals the show from the lesser-known actors and manages to pull off actual characters rather than thinly veiled versions of himself. Star Wars alumni Billy Dee Williams and Carrie Fisher both make cameos, as well as Ray Park who's given a small role as a security guard at Skywalker Ranch. On top of this, scenes and situations from the original trilogy are even recreated. The obvious missing cameo is George Lucas, but the man did give the film his blessing. Consequently, familiar sound effects are used here and there as Lucas granted the filmmakers the rights to the Lucasfilm audio library.

Sam Huntington, Chris Marquette, Dan Fogler and Jay Baruchel all place forth energetic performances as the four protagonists. They're a very watchable gang. Meanwhile, the eternally-charming Kristen Bell makes an appearance as a geeky young girl who joins the boys for their quest. Her reappearance at the halfway point gives the picture a welcome jolt of life.

Fanboys is not a Phantom Menace-level disappointment, but it remains a generic comedy. On the other hand, it's a very enjoyable, fun flick, and the humour is occasionally quite clever. The final sequence is particularly apt - when our heroes are camped in lines outside a theatre for the premiere of The Phantom Menace. In this single scene the filmmakers manage to accurately capture the tremendous anticipation for this particular movie event as well as the dedication of the fans. This is followed by a sly last-minute jab at the quality of the first Star Wars prequel. These moments, as well as other isolated scenes, are pure brilliance within an otherwise by-the-numbers motion picture.

The film jokingly and affectionately makes fun of fanboy culture, employing clichés to build the characters as well as their circumstances. While only a few fans will see a replica of themselves in one of the protagonists, all those who identify with the label "fanboy" will almost certainly see some representation of their passion on the screen. Fanboys is just really good, fast-paced fun, and it's easy entertainment.

6.7/10