Reviews by PvtCaboose91

"I've got to try and fix this. Trust me, I know what I'm doing."

American remakes of foreign films are almost always something to be dreaded, but Contraband is a surprising exception to the rule. Perhaps this is because the movie was directed and produced by Baltasar Kormákur, who starred in and produced the Icelandic flick Reykjavik-Rotterdam on which Contraband is based. More cynical filmgoers may be unimpressed by this gritty little crime-thriller since it's not exactly original or groundbreaking, yet Contraband is satisfying entertainment if you can suspend your pretensions. Its production values are surprisingly solid for such a low-budget film and the storytelling is both involving and gripping, though the script could've used a few more revisions before reaching the production stage.

Formerly a professional career smuggler, Chris Farraday (Wahlberg) chose to abandon the life of a criminal in order to raise his two children with loving wife Kate (Beckinsale) and make an honest living. Chris' serene life is threatened, though, when Kate's idiotic little brother Andy (Jones) botches an expensive cocaine smuggling operation for ruthless drug lord Tim Briggs (Ribisi), who now wants blood. Realising that his family will not be safe until the debt is paid, Chris is forced back into his former line of work, cooking up a money counterfeiting scheme which requires boat passage to Panama. Chris reunites with his former associates to pull off the heist, but nothing goes according to plan.

You cannot accuse writer Aaron Guzikowski of not paying enough attention to the plot here. Standard-issue heist action-thrillers are usually flimsy in terms of story, yet Contraband positively excels - it offers up plenty of unexpected plot twists and turns. The heist should be so simple, yet things keep going wrong and the stakes are continually upped, which is why this film is so engaging. Contraband's key pratfall, however, is that Kate is too much of a clichéd, vulnerable damsel in distress. It would have been more interesting if Kate was Chris' equal; if she encouraged Chris to do the job to save Andy rather than just issuing typical warnings and maintaining that there must be "another way" without offering suggestions. Hell, it would've been even better if Kate played a role in the heist herself. Furthermore, Tim's crime racket is not especially intimidating - Tim's residence (where his daughter lives) appears to be known by everyone, and there don't appear to be many enforcers (none of which guard Tim's house). Chris' friends could have obliterated Tim's syndicate without breaking a sweat, or even just assassinated Tim.

Contraband looks astonishingly assured for a $25 million production, and it's probably thanks to the low budget that the film feels so authentic since it had the freedom to be dark and edgy. Lacking the sugar-coated gloss of an expensive PG-13 blockbuster, the world of crime depicted here is grimy and raw - there's blood, the characters are given realistic leeway to swear, and you truly get the feeling that nobody is safe. Kormákur was right at home with this material - a shootout between criminals and law enforcers in Panama is nail-bitingly tense, and it's impossible to take your eyes away from the screen as the film barrels towards its edge-of-your-seat conclusion. Admittedly, cinematographer Barry Ackroyd (Green Zone, The Hurt Locker) adopted a dreaded shaky-cam routine here, yet it actually works to the film's benefit; the gritty handheld style suits the material. Topping this off, there are a few nice song choices from time to time, and Clinton Shorter's score is top-drawer.

Mark Wahlberg can play roles like this in his sleep. To his credit, though, he didn't actually phone this one in or sleepwalk through the film for the paycheque - he seems fully immersed in the material, and the intensity he brings to the role of Chris is spot-on. Alongside him, Ben Foster and Kate Beckinsale also bring their A game to the roles of Sebastian and Kate (respectively), but it's Giovanni Ribisi who absolutely steals the show as Tim. Ribisi is delightfully hammy and over-the-top, and he clearly had an utter blast playing such a callous kingpin. Sure, Ribisi's performance borders on cartoonish, but he's a pleasure to watch.

To be sure, Contraband has room for improvement, but it delivers proverbial thrills in a satisfying fashion. This is a fun, exciting little thriller with several exhilarating action sequences, and it kept this reviewer rapt for its two-hour duration. Nevertheless, Contraband has little staying power - it's pretty shallow, and it will probably be long forgotten by the end of 2012.

7.1/10

"It's hard to explain, because it's not just a dream. It's a feeling."

Take Shelter is further proof that independent motion pictures are one of the most reliable sources of excellence in today's unstable cinematic climate. Rather than an in-your-face thriller reliant on big special effects, Take Shelter is a quietly involving, harrowing drama with a lot on its mind. The movie meditates on the nature of dreams and faith, explores the way that fear, anger and paranoia can effect one's mental health, magnificently captures today's shaky economic conditions, and even has a few things to say about climate change. Added to this, writer-director Jeff Nichols is a superlative storyteller, and the film spotlights an exceptional leading performance courtesy of Michael Shannon.

Set in the Midwest, construction worker Curtis (Shannon) is largely living the American dream - he has a steady job, and he's fathering a daughter (Stewart) with his beautiful, loving wife Samantha (Chastain). However, Curtis begins enduring apocalyptic dreams of storms, tornadoes and faceless strangers trying to abduct his daughter. As these dreams/visions start seeping into his daytime activities, Curtis grows unsure as to whether he's slowly going mad or having genuine premonitions. While secretly seeking medical help, Curtis also becomes obsessed with the storm shelter in his backyard, spending thousands of dollars the family doesn't even have to expand and improve it. With Curtis' actions growing more erratic, he starts to alienate his family and friends. Nevertheless, Curtis is determined to work to prevent the catastrophic doomsday scenarios brewing inside of his mind.

At face value, Take Shelter seems like a psychological thriller with disaster film overtones, yet the movie is far more substantive and thoughtful - it's predominantly a portrait of developing madness which contains a few terrifying disaster theatrics to assist this agenda. In a sense, Nichols' movie has a certain M. Night Shyamalan quality to it, as it possesses the same cadence and spirit of something like 2002's Signs. Not to mention, Nichols' storytelling relies on mounting intensity and the unpredictability of coming events. Perhaps what's most interesting about Take Shelter is that it's not exactly about whether or not Curtis is mad, but rather about how Curtis must come to terms with what's happening to him.

From minute one, Nichols places us into the head of Curtis, allowing us to experience his chilling visions alongside the confused protagonist. We can understand the anxiety that Curtis endures as he receives scorn and scowling from the community while working to do what he believes is right, no matter the cost (financial or otherwise). Also commendable is the script's treatment of Curtis - he's not just a crazy person but a genuinely scared and confused family man. Thus, he tries to hide his problems from his wife and secretively seeks help (he even visits his mother who was diagnosed with schizophrenia at his age, and borrows a book about mental illness from the library) as he works on the tornado shelter to address every possible meaning behind his harrowing dreams. Take Shelter is, indeed, a terrific demonstration of a character-driven narrative.

It may be a low-budget indie, but Take Shelter possesses utterly gorgeous visuals. Adam Stone's cinematography skilfully captures the beautiful natural landscapes and the dream sequences are magnificently atmospheric, with seamless digital effects resulting in a number of surreal, scary images that'll remain embedded in your mind for days. Also effective is David Wingo's low-key score; it's well-judged and effective, and it perfectly matches the happenings on-screen. However, while Nichols' direction for the most part makes for compelling viewing, the movie at times feels overdrawn. For instance, an extended scene of Samantha pleading with Curtis in the tornado shelter is prolonged to melodramatic proportions, and will probably leave you confused rather than intrigued about what will happen next.

Michael Shannon received an Oscar nomination for his performance in Revolutionary Road, and is highly regarded for his work on Boardwalk Empire. Believe it: Shannon deserves to be a leading man, as his performance here is remarkable from top to bottom. He's the kind of actor able to express pages of dialogue with merely a look, and convey subtle changes in mood and awareness in a way that veteran actors can only dream of. Best of all, Shannon gives Curtis genuine three-dimensionality. There's never a moment in the film in which Shannon feels false or unbelievable, and the fact that he didn't earn an Oscar nomination is one of the worst oversights in recent memory. Likewise, Jessica Chastain (who received an Oscar nomination for The Help) is fantastic as Samantha. Not just a one-note harpy constantly yelling at her husband, Chastain plays the role as someone who loves Curtis and is willing to adapt to the worst of conditions. The steadiness she emanates serves to make Curtis look all the more erratic.

Take Shelter would've achieved dizzying heights of excellence if it were a tad tauter, but it's hard to hold too much against this remarkable film. It's full of striking imagery, and the stunning visuals are mixed with provocative themes. As the icing on top, it winds down with an ambiguous ending that defies expectation and is destined to keep movie-goers talking for a long time to come. Let the interpretations and film scholar essay writing commence...

8.5/10

"Though our story is at an end, our poet's is not; for his monument is everliving. Not of stone but of verse. And it shall be remembered. As long as words are made of breath. And breath of life."

Roland Emmerich has based his career around pure spectacle - his résumé includes the likes of Independence Day, Godzilla, The Day After Tomorrow and 2012, all of which provide fun but dramatically weak visions of large-scale mayhem. 2011's Anonymous is a radical departure from the director's comfort zone, as it represents Emmerich's first attempt at a drama-focused human story. Scripted by John Orloff, the film is a bold rendering of a controversial conspiracy theory which asserts that Shakespeare was a fraud. Rather than a Dan Brown-esque mystery involving present-day characters following clues and scrutinising the theory, Anonymous is a historical period drama exploring the tumultuous royal and political climate during the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign. While the film is brought down by an array of issues, its audacious nature and the lack of brainless Emmerich-style spectacle is to be admired.

Set centuries ago in Elizabethan England, struggling playwright Ben Jonson (Armesto) encounters political resistance as he seeks to make his mark on the local theatre scene. Meanwhile, nobleman Edward de Vere (Ifans) writes plays in secret but cannot have his name attached to them in fear of damage to his reputation. Longing to hear his words be performed, de Vere chooses Ben to be his front man, asking Jonson to stage his plays and take credit for the writing. After a performance of de Vere's Henry V which beguiles spectators, buffoonish actor William Shakespeare (Spall) decides to steal the credit from Jonson without de Vere's blessing. Left with little choice, de Vere continues to deliver his plays and sonnets to Shakespeare, who soon becomes rich and famous as a result.

Anonymous' biggest problem is its messy, jumbled structure. Emmerich jumps around the timeline too much without the aid of title cards, making the narrative difficult to follow. For instance, after initially transitioning into the Elizabethan-era story, the film heads back five years (via the lone title card), and subsequently leaps back even further at certain points. All of the chaotic back and forth becomes so bewildering that by the time we return to the opening sequence, it's hard to discern where we are in the narrative. Exacerbating this problem is the film's studious lack of humanity and substance. Emmerich's shortcomings with drama are pinpointed with laser precision here as pretty much the entire film is drama. Consequently, pacing is uneven. Anonymous sparkles the most during its opening and closing scenes, when actor Derek Jacobi stands on a bare stage to deliver monologues with engaging command and grace. Perhaps the entire film should have been framed around Jacobi's words, with the story halting to allow the performer to present evidence or explain the mechanics of certain vague plot machinations. It probably would've seemed like a lazy device, yet the film would've at least been enrapturing and easy to follow.

Dramatic issues aside, Anonymous is a tremendous success in terms of summoning a feel for time and place. Emmerich immaculately recreated the period on a scant $30 million budget, with Oscar-nominated costume design and lavish sets (aided by a bit of CGI) elevating the sense of authenticity. Anonymous lacks the glossy romanticism of something like Shakespeare in Love - this is a grimy, dark, disgusting vision of Elizabethan England complete with grotty interiors, mud-splattered streets and yellow teeth. But Emmerich was restricted by the PG-13 rating, which forbade him from being more graphic or explicit (the flick is especially tame in terms of shootings and stabbings). Furthermore, the film tries to hammer home its theories to such an extent that Shakespeare is depicted as a talentless, illiterate, stupid buffoon. It's cheap characterisation; certainly audacious, but the depiction feels hyperbolic.

Leading the cast is an outstanding Rhys Ifans, who's never anything less than convincing as Edward de Vere. However, trouble arises due to the casting of Jamie Campbell Bower as Edward in his younger years. There's supposed to be forty years separating the two versions of the role, yet the 42-year-old Ifans looks in his mid-30s while the 22-year-old Bower looks no younger than 20. It's a peculiar casting decision, and some viewers may not even realise that these two are playing the same character (now that's a red flag...). On a more positive note, Vanessa Redgrave bursts with gravitas as Queen Elizabeth - the actress truly threw herself into the role, and her performance is outstanding. The one who stands out the most, though, is Sebastian Armesto as Ben Jonson. Armesto looks perpetually focused, and every line seems completely authentic. It's a marvellous performance, and he lights up the film whenever he's on-screen.

Cynical historians will probably suffer coronaries as they clamber to debunk screenwriter Orloff's theories about William Shakespeare, but Anonymous is fascinating if you're open-minded enough... And if you're lenient enough towards the picture's gaping problems.

6.0/10

"You people are working stiffs, clock-punchers. Easily replaced."

With Brett Ratner at the helm and a cast like this, it should come as no surprise to learn that Tower Heist is incredibly dumb. It's stupid on such a monumental scale that you're likely to yell out "Oh come on!" at the screen on several occasions. Indeed, this is a heist movie without the intelligence of Ocean's Eleven or The Italian Job - instead, Ratner merely aimed to throw a few big stars into a slickly-produced action-comedy to entertain the masses. Astonishingly, the finished product is more fun than it had any right to be. Say what you will about Ratner, but he knows how to make a good-looking movie and he's skilled at creating enjoyable cinematic junk food.

Josh Kovacs (Stiller) is the building manager at an exclusive New York City high-rise known as The Tower. Inhabiting the penthouse is the powerful and wealthy Arthur Shaw (Alda), who commands a lot of respect from the staff. However, the FBI are onto Shaw's case, and soon arrest him on the charge of securities fraud. As it turns out, Shaw's entire portfolio is fake, and all of the money invested in him - including the pension fund of The Tower's workers - has vanished, shocking Josh and his colleagues. With Shaw under guarded house arrest, Josh sets out to make things right, dreaming up a scheme to steal the $20 million that he's convinced is hidden in Shaw's apartment. To do this, Josh recruits co-workers Charlie (Affleck), Enrique (Peña) and Odessa (Sidibe), as well as failed Wall Street business Mr. Fitzhugh (Broderick) and petty criminal Slide (Murphy).

Tower Heist has a lot of glaring problems in the logistics department. Without going into specifics, the hijinks that ensue as the gang pull off the heist are beyond the unbelievable (neither a window washing platform nor an elevator can support the weight of a car). And there are a number of holes (Josh fakes a court order but how the fuck did he manage to pull it off so credibly?) and stupid plot devices (the guards are distracted by a Playboy magazine for hours and never look at their monitors while the heist is happening?), not to mention the characters are shallow and make little sense (Charlie changes sides a lot without any logic or reason, and Slide and Odessa's flirtations lead nowhere). There are several other plot elements which fail to sit right, too. Indeed, Tower Heist is tailor-made for viewers who don't care about cohesiveness, coherency or consistency. To its credit, though, the script does take a few unexpected directions - the romantic subplot between Josh and an FBI agent is handled in a surprisingly unconventional fashion, and the film's ending is not as realistically contrived as it could've been. Nevertheless, the film needed major rewrites before going in front of the cameras.

Brett Ratner is hated far and wide, yet the director is not nearly as bad as his reputation implies. His films are usually cheery and fun (see the Rush Hour series), and Tower Heist proves that he's still able to create serviceable, crowd-pleasing escapism. Scoring a satisfying amount of laughs as it goes about its business, the picture moves with a commendably fleet foot, entertaining and pleasing for pretty much every frame of its 100-minute runtime. This is essentially the director's answer to the Ocean's Eleven trilogy, melding the intrigue and ensemble dynamics of those pictures with Ratner's signature action-comedy style. The combo results in an infectious energy, and the rock-solid production values combined with an armrest-clenching climax is the icing on top. But while Tower Heist is funny, the script irritatingly cuts a few corners. For instance, in one scene Slide locks the rest of the gang on a rooftop in the snow and tells them to pick the lock. Suddenly, there's an abrupt transition to the next scene when they're all inside. Huh?

A lot of critics have praised Eddie Murphy's performance here, and for good reason. At last, after doing too many dumb kids' movies and low-brow comedies, Murphy has returned to form with Tower Heist, playing a smart-ass in the funniest performance he's delivered in at least a decade. It's wonderful to see Murphy having fun with such a politically incorrect role that allows him plenty of leeway for one-liners. However the PG-13 rating does restrict the content, and one can't help but imagine how fantastic Murphy could've been with the freedom to have a potty mouth. Ben Stiller and Casey Affleck, meanwhile, are somewhat unmemorable here, though Matthew Broderick and Michael Peña are both an absolute riot. Acclaimed Precious star Gabourey Sidibe even shows up in the film, putting on a hammy Jamaican accent to great comedic effect. Also impressive is Alan Alda, who capably sells both sides of Shaw's persona: a gentle grandfather, and an evil schemer.

In its early life, Tower Heist was pitched by Eddie Murphy as an urban version of Ocean's Eleven starring the likes of Chris Rock, Dave Chappelle and Eddie Griffin. But the script was eventually transformed into the blue-collar alternative to Steven Soderbergh's ritzy movies. The judge is out about which version would've worked better, but, at the end of the day, Tower Heist is a lot of fun, even if it's not as brilliantly-constructed or as memorable as cinema's best heist movies.

6.1/10

"If you don't do this, he's dead..."

It's easy to make incorrect assumptions about 2011's Killer Elite, as it comes across as just another generic Jason Statham actioner with the usual assortment of fisticuffs and violence. But in reality, this is an intense spy thriller with an '80s setting and a '70s action sensibility, and it's purportedly based on a true story. Indeed, Killer Elite is an adaptation of Sir Ranulph Fiennes' 1991 novel The Feather Men, which claims to be true but has sparked ongoing controversy about its veracity. Even if Fiennes' book is fictional, Killer Elite remains a well-made piece of action entertainment; a full-throttle machismo fest with more story and character interaction than less competent blockbusters. It's a completely empty technical exercise lacking in substance, but it's smarter than anticipated.

Ex-special ops agent Danny Bryce (Statham) is a mercenary for hire under the guidance of veteran soldier-of-fortune Hunter (De Niro). Danny decides to leave the business following a hit in Mexico, and retires to rural Australia seeking a more peaceful life. However, Danny soon learns that a vengeful sheik in the Middle-East has kidnapped Hunter, and will only let him go if Danny carries out a dangerous assignment. In exchange for Hunter's life, Danny has to track down, obtain confessions from and kill the former SAS operatives responsible for murdering the sheik's sons. As Danny travels the globe with a ragtag team orchestrating the assassinations, the ruthless, idealistic Spike (Owen) sets out to stop the killers. Spike is a member of a clandestine group known as The Feather Men, who operate in the shadows to protect their best interests.

Killer Elite comes up unmistakably short in terms of humanity and substance. Its runtime is pretty hefty at almost two hours, yet the film never lets us get to know any of these characters - instead, they go through the motions with a bare minimum of development and with only one or two distinguishable traits. And that's an issue, because the main players are fundamentally villains and we don't really have anyone to root for. As a result, the razzle-dazzle never invokes any emotion or feeling, rendering the film enjoyable in the moment but completely hollow. To be fair, there is an attempt to bestow Danny with dimension by introducing a love interest and touching upon the sense of assassin guilt he feels, but this stuff is only partially successful; it never gains the full traction or gravity it could've achieved in defter hands. At the very least, though, Killer Elite is more focused on plot twists and fascinating espionage antics than brainless 'splosions, maintaining interest despite the lack of emotional investment and only very rarely calling for a suspension of disbelief.

From a visual standpoint, Killer Elite is a very slick and cool movie indeed, with tag-teaming cinematographers Simon Duggan and Alain Duplantier maintaining an accomplished sense of style from start to finish. Furthermore, the film evokes the 1980s time period with subtle believability, as the frame is delicately permeated with '80s-specific background details rather than beating us over the head with stereotypes. Director Gary McKendry also seems to be aware that overzealous CGI cannot match the raw testosterone of real stunt work and impressive choreography. Accordingly, the practically-achieved action set-pieces are grounded and bursting with excitement. McKendry is no John Woo, but his action sequences are fluid and fun (not to mention agreeably violent), though the shaky camerawork is a bit irritating from time to time.

Leading the cast are Jason Statham and Clive Owen, who imbue the material with more credibility than someone like Sylvester Stallone or Arnold Schwarzenegger would've offered. Statham assumed his proverbial tough-as-nails routine here, but at least he's good at what he does, and he has a stronger screen presence than more subpar action stars. Owen (sporting a hilariously hammy moustache) impresses as well - he's not an especially versatile performer, but he is badass and watchable. Probably the biggest standout is Dominic Purcell of Prison Break fame (sporting a moustache of the handlebar variety) who plays one of Danny's cronies. Purcell is a good fit for his character, as he has the right brutish look and attitude. Meanwhile, Robert De Niro has more minor role than the marketing campaign suggested. He apparently spent a total of 10 days on the film, so he only pops up here and there, though he does participate in some awesome action and he's better here than most critics seem to think.

In many ways, Killer Elite is a throwback movie - it harkens back to an era when action-thrillers actually had balls; when muscular bravado was mixed with violent R-rated action to overcome deficiencies in the depth and storytelling department. While the production is not quite "elite", this is a better-than-average action film which delivers satisfying thrills and action on an impressively consistent basis. Sometimes, that's just enough to warrant at least a mild recommendation.

6.8/10

"See, but... that's bullshit. That's what everyone has been telling me since the beginning. "Oh, you're gonna be okay," and "Oh, everything's fine," and like, it's not... It makes it worse... that no one will just come out and say it. Like, "hey man, you're gonna die.""

It's not often that you hear the words "cancer" and "comedy" in the same breathe. After all, cancer is a heartbreakingly serious illness, and it would be insensitive to mine the topic for cheap laughs. Enter 2011's 50/50, a wonderful film which manages to extract humour from situations that occur due to cancer while at the same time treating the delicate subject seriously and with utmost sensitivity. How is it possible to make people laugh without being insensitive? How can tears be wrung without being mawkish? How can filmmakers make people laugh and cry without feeling calculated? It's such a daunting proposition that even the most skilled writer wouldn't even dare to try it. And yet, 50/50 - which was written by an actual cancer survivor - succeeds at these ostensibly impossible goals, making the process of combining honest-to-goodness laughs with fatiguing emotion look incredibly easy.

Public radio writer Adam (Gordon-Levitt) is just a regular young guy; he exercises frequently, he avoids drugs and smoking, and he generally lives his life in a straight and sensible fashion. Dating beautiful modern artist Rachael (Dallas Howard) and not even thirty yet, Adam becomes numbed with shock when he's diagnosed with a form of spinal cancer which requires chemotherapy. As his intensive treatment begins, Adam seeks comfort from slacker friend Kyle (Rogen) and student therapist Katie (Kendrick) while Rachael finds herself ill-equipped to deal with such a tragic state of affairs.

On the surface, 50/50 sounds like superficial movie-of-the-week territory - the type that disregards subtlety to jerk as many tears as possible without earning the privilege. But writer Will Reiser and director Jonathan Levine eschewed such easy routes, deciding against stereotypes and intrusive musical cues in favour of a more effectively understated approach, trusting in the saddening reality of the situation and the sympathetic, endearing characters to give the film its emotion. Yes, 50/50 makes you cry, but the emotional responses come as the result of real heartbreaking events rather than a heavy-handed score. Nothing is more affecting than playing on the universally relatable love between mother and son, or the daunting reality check which comes when an amiable person dies. As Reiser based the script on his own experience with cancer, the picture possesses a phenomenal lived-in quality that's rarely matched. Yet, the film is also able to skilfully navigate from pathos to unforced comedy. And none of the humour is cheap; laughs are gleaned as a result of genuinely witty character interaction. All of the laughs are well-judged, with Levine and Reiser maintaining a bright spirit amid the sadness, capturing both the light and the dark of this depressing situation.

Admittedly, 50/50 could only end one of two ways and it has a few clichéd surface details, and this fools us into perhaps thinking that the film is less skilful than it is. But it's the storytelling and Reiser's screenwriting which allows the film to feel entirely believable rather than a retread of familiar territory. Adam's mother (Huston) overreacts to everything, Adam's father (Houde) suffers from Alzheimer's disease and there's a love interest subplot, yet all of it fits into the story naturally and nothing is overplayed. Indeed, the dramatic structure is practically invisible. It's also fortunate that Levine's direction is perfectly-judged. 50/50 is not a drab, one-note drama - unexpectedly, it's eminently enjoyable and watchable all the way through; a testament to Reiser's engaging writing and the agreeable tone devised by Levine.

In the lead role of Adam, Joseph Gordon-Levitt again shows that he's one of the best young actors working in the industry today, and he comes across as the most human he's ever been in a movie. Gordon-Levitt was up to the challenge of tackling every aspect of this multifaceted character, effortlessly mixing detachment and vulnerability to play a regular guy unexpectedly confronted with his own mortality. The actor's dramatic scenes are especially raw and heart-wrenching. Fortunately, Gordon-Levitt shares excellent chemistry with Seth Rogen, who was friends with writer Will Reiser for years and was literally asked to play himself here. Rogen never stretches his abilities as an actor here, yet he's never been more believable and mature on-screen, proving that he can handle both serious and comedic material. The banter between Rogen and Gordon-Levitt positively sparkles, too. In the supporting cast, Anna Kendrick is sweetly endearing as nervous young therapist Katie, and Bryce Dallas Howard makes for a believable Rachael. Anjelica Huston is another scene-stealer as Adam's mother, and anyone with a mum will be amazed by how authentic she seems. Small joys are also derived from Philip Baker Hall and Matt Frewer playing a pair of cancer patients who befriend Adam in the hospital.

Instead of leaving you worn out and depressed, 50/50 will leave you with a good feeling. And it doesn't achieve this through cheap, manipulative methods; it's earned with honesty. The film is both a powerful drama that'll make you laugh and a skilful comedy that'll make you cry, but it at no point feels tonally schizophrenic or uneven. The cast is flawless and the writing & direction is superlative, showing that it's possible to make a thoroughly engaging picture about a lead character with cancer.

9.5/10

"Welcome to Fright Night. For real."

In 1985's Fright Night, Peter Vincent pointed out that '80s movie-goers aren't interested in seeing vampires (or vampire killers) anymore; "All they want to see is slashers running around in ski masks, hacking up young virgins." In 2011, these words ring ever truer. The Twilight series has expunged any interest and menace that vampires once had, and not a lot of imagination or thought goes into today's successful horror movies. To reinvigorate cinematic bloodsuckers back in 1985, the original Fright Night employed a meta, postmodern approach to vampires, and it succeeded marvellously. While 2011's Fright Night failed to do the same thing for the noughties, it's better than expected; a rare type of remake which takes off in new directions as opposed to slavishly sticking to the original template. Retaining the same basic premise, spirit, characters and comedy-horror tone of the 1985 film while updating the background details, era and setting, director Craig Gillespie and writer Marti Noxon have produced a worthy tribute to its forefather that's unafraid to have its own voice.

A high school senior living in a desert community on the outskirts of Las Vegas, Charley Brewster (Yelchin) is plagued by typical adolescent dilemmas, maintaining a relationship with girlfriend Amy (Poots) while enjoying newfound acceptance with the "in crowd" and distancing himself from childhood best friend Ed (Mintz-Plasse). When locals start going missing under mysterious circumstances, Ed alerts Charley that his charismatic new next-door neighbour Jerry (Farrell) is in fact a vampire. Convinced through evidence gathering and first-hand experiences, Charley seeks advice from Vegas occult showman Peter Vincent (Tennant) who has posited himself as a vampire expert. With Jerry setting his sights on both Amy and Charley's mother (Collette), Charley begins planning an attack, seeking to uncover Jerry's weakness before the undead vampire cleans out the entire neighbourhood with his fangs.

Approaching Fright Night with the terrific 1985 film in mind would be improper, as this update is its own independent entity. It borrows a few beats from its predecessor and the story set-up is a bit familiar, but screenwriter Noxon plots a fresh path at about the halfway point, leading to an enjoyable reimagining of the original film's proceedings. And this is, of course, the mark of a good remake: using the source as a springboard to land in unexpected destinations. Screenwriter Noxon is a long-time veteran of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer TV show, and she transferred to Fright Night the elements which made that series such a hit: smart dialogue and postmodern wit mixed with genuine horror and creepy imagery. Heck, there are even pop culture nods within the stinging dialogue, including a jab against Twilight. But the script is not airtight, as there are a few head-scratching holes. For instance, why don't any of the characters buy a UV lamp to fight the vampires? And how did Peter get Charley's phone number?

Craig Gillespie's résumé only boasts the likes of Lars and the Real Girl and 2007's dreadful Mr. Woodcock, making him an odd choice to helm this remake. But Gillespie's handling of Noxon's script is astonishingly assured and strong, smoothly guiding the action, horror and comedic scenes. The climax is particularly impressive; it's a badass action scene which raises the pulse and keeps us on the edge of our seats. There are a few instances of shoddy CGI, but the visual effects are otherwise convincing. Javier Aguirresarobe's cinematography is sumptuous as well (even though Aguirresarobe photographed two Twilight movies...), while the moody score by Ramin Djawadi represents an effectively atmospheric aural accompaniment (even though it's a tad on the generic side, and is not a patch on the original film's outstandingly memorable score).

Fright Night is also available in 3-D; a rather baffling creative decision. The 3-D is inessential, yet the movie was at least shot with proper 3-D cameras. Furthermore, the image is bright enough to endure the dimming which comes with 3-D glasses, and the multiple dimensions are used well to bring depth and convey space. Added to this, there are a few moments in which objects (or blood splatter) look to be popping out of the screen. Major kudos to Gillespie and Aguirresarobe for not just sloppily using the extra dimension as a way to inflate box office profits.

Fortunately, the acting is solid right across the board. Unlikely hero Anton Yelchin works extremely well as Charley - his baby face makes him believable as a former dweeb and a romantic lead, and he doesn't look out of place when faced with more action-oriented elements. Yelchin has a great deal of charm and is an agreeable screen presence, which helps let this remake work as well as it does. Imogen Poots, meanwhile, is terrific alongside Yelchin, and the two share marvellous chemistry. Fright Night is Colin Farrell's show, however; he sunk his teeth into the character of Jerry, creating a compelling, amusing and at times frightening villain. David Tennant is equally valuable as Peter Vincent, abandoning the more grandfatherly version of the character from the 1985 film to play a mix of Russell Brand and Criss Angel. Tennant is no Roddy McDowell, but he lightens up the film whenever he's around, providing energy and comic relief.

Admittedly, Fright Night doesn't work as well as its forerunner, as it replaces hammy, cheesy old-school charm with slick production values. It's almost a given in this day and age, but the heart and flavour of the original film is lost, and the replacement aura is more on the generic side. However, of course, it's up to personal taste and opinion to decide which version is superior. When all's said and done, though, 2011's Fright Night is fun and entertaining; an R-rated vampire comedy-horror flick which will appeal to teens without insulting more mature film-goers.

6.8/10

"Once more into the fray. Into the last good fight I'll ever know. Live and die on this day. Live and die on this day."

The Grey is a far better, more thoughtful movie than its misleading marketing campaign promised. With Liam Neeson in the lead and trailers promising a roller-coaster action ride, it looked as if we were essentially in for Taken with wolves in Alaska. However, The Grey is of a different ballpark of action movie - it's a film concerned with character and tension, sturdily fusing drama and nail-biting thrills to terrific effect. It's also gritty and grounded; a chilling study of survival which spends its time examining the behaviour of distressed people thrown into extraordinary circumstances. Director Joe Carnahan may have failed with 2010's misfire The A-Team, but we've clearly been underestimating this guy, as the level of maturity and skill he displays here promises Carnahan a spot among Hollywood's elite.

Depressed and on the verge of suicide due to the loss of a loved one, John Ottway (Neeson) works for an oil company in Alaska, using his rifle to protect workers from potential wolf attacks. On the trip home, John's plane crashes in the middle of the remote Alaskan wilderness during a snowstorm, leaving seven survivors and a handful of corpses. As the group start to recover and struggle to endure the harsh, subzero temperatures, a more immediate threat presents itself: a pack of hungry wolves looking to kill those trespassing in their territory. Assuming the role of makeshift leader, Ottway calls upon his animal expertise as he leads the weary, frightened men to a nearby forest - and, hopefully, to rescue.

In keeping with Carnahan's usual output, The Grey is an exceedingly manly movie - it has gallows humour, male bonding, ego clashes, manly banter, heroism and noble sacrifices. With the freedom of an R rating, these elements feel real and it's easy to find yourself tricked by the illusion that the film establishes. Admittedly, The Grey contains a handful of stock character types, yet the script (by Carnahan and co-writer Ian Mackenzie Jeffers) gives them genuine three-dimensionality. The trademark asshole, for instance, undergoes arcs and exhibits depth; something not often seen in your typical Michael Bay blockbuster. And Ottway is more than just a clichéd hero - his character allows for the filmmakers to explore weighty issues. Ottway's opening monologue in particular is utterly heart-wrenching. Furthermore, as the story is more or less a character study of Ottway battling personal demons, there's the suggestion that the film's proceedings may be a metaphorical representations of Ottway's internal struggles as he slowly dies. After all, the script assumes a standard routine of characters being picked off one-by-one, but this makes sense if you consider that they are dying constituents of Ottway's psyche. It's fantastic food for thought.

Beginning with the most harrowing and visceral plane crash in years, The Grey is fucking riveting until the very end. Carnahan is especially skilled at building and maintaining unbearable tension, using the crew's perpetual vulnerability as a way to keep us on the edge of our seats at all times. Furthermore, Carnahan respects his audience too much to stoop to cheap scares. Instead, the thrills are earned. A scene in which several pairs of wolf eyes appear out of the pitch-black darkness is a complete "shit your pants" moment, and it doesn't even have any loud music cues or gore. The film was shot in real freezing conditions in British Columbia, and this audacious creative decision is extremely beneficial to the atmosphere and eerie sense of dread and isolation. The wolf attacks, too, were pulled off with competent CGI and animatronics, though Carnahan's trademark shaky-cam/quick-cutting routine is too overdone at times. Marc Streitenfeld's musical accompaniment also impresses, as it's effective at building atmosphere.

Liam Neeson is predictably sublime here, infusing the material with all-important gravitas. This is one of Neeson's greatest performances to date - he becomes John Ottway, and you can sense the character's depression and world experience behind his weary eyes. Neeson has proved that he can handle both serious drama and hard-nosed action; here, he combines the two modes with effortless abandon. Fortunately, Neeson's supporting cast is top-notch. The likes of Dallas Roberts, Frank Grillo and Dermot Mulroney all hit their marks perfectly, and there's never a moment that feels faux or artificial. These guys feel like real people, and it's easy to ponder the question of "What would I do?" while watching the men endure harrowing circumstances.

Wolf attacks constitute barely any of The Grey's running time, as Carnahan's film is more interested in watching its protagonists deal with the undying threat of the beasts' presence. Not a dumb action film, the flick has unexpected depth and substance, leading to a turn towards existentialism as the bold ending approaches. The ending leaves things open for interpretation, while a brief post-credits shot helps to create some type of closure. People are destined to be pissed about how it ends, yet it's pitch-perfect in the eyes of this reviewer as it's a creative solution to avoid being conventional. The Grey is an exceptional, harsh film which will likely end up being one of the top films of 2012.

9.1/10

"I am an Apex Predator. Does the lion feel bad killing the gazelle? Do people feel remorse when they kill a fly?"

Chronicle is yet another addition to the "found footage" subgenre, following on in the tradition of The Blair Witch Project and the Paranormal Activity series whereby movies claim to be authentic footage captured by real people. We've seen horror films and monster movies done in such a style, so Chronicle does something different: it presents a trademark found footage spin on the superhero genre. Produced for a scant $12 million, this is a creative, well-made little gem which doesn't overlook the importance of storytelling and character. See, more than just a brainless blockbuster about superheroes, Chronicle is a story about the fragile nature of teenage minds and the friendships we form during high school years. Freshman director Josh Trank and writer Max Landis demonstrate an astute understanding of these issues, giving the film a tremendous emotional boost not often seen in superhero movies.

Andrew (DeHaan) is a viciously bullied, lonely and depressed high school senior with an abusive home life. Fed up with his unfair treatment, Andrew purchases a camera to record every step of his life, and grows to adore the confessional opportunities provided by his new camcorder. After a humiliating episode at a party one night, Andrew's cousin Matt (Russell) and classmate Steve (Jordan) take Andrew as they venture into a mysterious underground tunnel. Inside, the trio find an alien contraption which knocks them all unconscious. The next day, the boys find that they have telekinetic powers, and can use their minds to manipulate whatever objects they wish. But the euphoric honeymoon does not last very long, as Andrew's problems continue to take their toll on his delicate mental state and friendships begin to splinter.

Since certain limitations are inherent in the found footage gimmick and we can only see things through the eyes of the characters, the source of the boys' superhuman powers is never explored in any great depth. And that's fine - Chronicle is not a pretentious piece of sci-fi; it's a film about what would happen if confused teenagers inherited amazing abilities. Landis and Trank embraced the chance to explore the possibilities of young teens with telekinetic powers, tracking the boys as they create a new realm of wish-fulfilment, prank and play previously deemed impossible. Indeed, unlike Peter Parker, the philosophy of "with great power comes great responsibility" is not exactly on the boys' minds as they enjoy their newfound abilities. Acquiring super-powers doesn't exactly mean that you get a sound moral compass as well, so Chronicle spends time provocatively examining the psychological problems of becoming God. Additionally, Landis' script takes a close look at the cracks which form in Andrew's psychological state, watching as he grows from depressed loner to powerful God-like being fuelled by his potent domestic troubles.

The question of "Why do they keep filming?" often causes found footage movies to crumble, but Chronicle introduces a few creative solutions to this nagging question. On a few occasions, for instance, Andrew uses telekinesis to fly the camera around him. And once the film shifts gears into full-on mayhem, we see events unfold though phones, security cameras and other home camcorders, with Trank embracing the fact that cameras are literally everywhere in this day and age (though Andrew's camera is set up in an odd spot in a hospital, stretching credulity). Most found footage flicks eschew lavish spectacle under the guise of "realism", but Trank ensures that we don't walk away hungry. Indeed, after dealing with teenage neuroses for a good 60 minutes, Trank ventures into more violent territory for a stunning climax that may cause Hollywood's best action directors to weep with envy. The finale is simply magnificent; a combination of a Greek tragedy and an insane roller-coaster ride which nails the balance between pathos and fantasy. The budget was low, yet the special effects are highly effective. Chronicle is at times harrowing as well - Trank truly tested the limits of the PG-13 rating while exploring Andrew's destructive capabilities.

Naturalistic performances are the most critical constituent of any found footage movie, as any trace of artifice destroys the illusion. Fortunately, Chronicle nails this requirement, boasting a cast of unknown actors who inhabited their roles to terrific effect. Dane DeHaan is simply a revelation here as Andrew - he's utterly convincing as both the depressed social outsider and the vengeful superhuman. A less talented performer would have leaned on shrill melodrama, but DeHaan is too good for such lazy shortcuts. Meanwhile, Alex Russell is believable and charming as Andrew's cousin Matt, and Michael B. Jordan is charm personified as the popular Steve. The three leads share an effortless camaraderie which feels completely authentic.

Chronicle more or less represents a merger of The Breakfast Club and a typical "birth of a hero/villain" tale. The result is an exciting motion picture which will also resonate with anyone who found high school to be a place of social misery. Admittedly, a few of Chronicle's narrative elements are a bit too standard-order (including a character death to up the stakes which doesn't sit right) and one gets the sense that Trank and Landis could have done more (the film runs a scant 75 minutes). Nevertheless, the film is a superb effort by everyone involved, heralding the arrival of a new filmmaking talent in the shape of Josh Trank, who'll soon be offered every single superhero movie currently in development.

7.8/10

"There's nothing heroic about what I do. It's dirty work."

Troll Hunter (or Trolljegeren) is an ingenious little Norwegian import, a found footage production with sturdy visual effects, convincing acting and a crafty script. It's a mockumentary willing to go above and beyond the call of duty, taking the time to build a rich sense of universe lore and introduce a thoroughly fascinating central character. Found footage pictures often grow banal due to their deadly serious disposition, which is why the genre has ostensibly passed its use-by date. It's also why Troll Hunter is so wonderfully refreshing, as it puts a realistic found footage spin on a fantastical premise while simultaneously being playfully jokey. Director/co-writer André Øvredal does not set out to bore us with straight horror; he wants us to have a good time with this agreeably tongue-in-cheek ride, providing a lively, sorely needed jolt for this much-maligned subgenre.

When evidence arises in the Norwegian town of Volda that unorthodox bear poaching is occurring, college students Thomas (Glenn Erland Tosterud), Johanna (Johanna Mørck) and Kalle (Tomas Alf Larsen) grab their filmmaking gear to conduct journalistic research. Their expedition soon leads them to the enigmatic Hans (Otto Jespersen), and they start pressing the gruff man for questioning. As it turns out, the grizzled Hans is not a bear poacher but a troll hunter working for the covert Troll Security Service organisation, who is tasked with controlling any trolls who wander past their boundaries. Hans accepts the students as observers, leading them around the country as they learn about troll mythology and stumble upon various monsters. But Thomas and his crew are also ignorant and refuse to realise the danger that will come from their filmmaking attention.

The history of the trolls and the Troll Security Service is pure gold, and it is clear that a lot of thought went into devising the flick's internal lore. For instance, since it is commonly accepted that trolls turn to stone in sunlight, Hans carries around a UV gun and has UV lights mounted on his jeep to combat them. The script even provides a scientific explanation to plausibly explain why the sun turns trolls to stone. Furthermore, Øvredal projects the film's mythology onto everyday findings to amusing effect. In one scene, for example, the characters find a typical open landscape beset with rocks, which, as it turns out, is actually a troll battlefield. Øvredal healthily retains this splendid sense of humour throughout, and it's small details like these that give Troll Hunter more depth than other pictures of this ilk.

Key to Troll Hunter's success is the character of Hans. A bit like Quint from Jaws, Hans is a gruff old bastard who has seen his fair share of action and has grown weary of his unrewarding trade. In a less skilful movie, there would not be any believable motive for Hans to allow college kids to film him, but Øvredal realises the importance of making us believe Hans's decision, and it works. See, troll hunting is, in fact, a drab profession - Hans is merely an unsung hero whose phenomenal achievements are shielded from the general public. Controversial Norwegian comedian Otto Jespersen is a perfect fit for this character, as he looks the part and has the right persona to match. Jespersen works particularly well because of his nonchalant attitude - Hans clearly does not give a shit, treating life-threatening battles as if he's just mowing the lawn. For example, after putting on ridiculous-looking armour to protect himself as he prepares to kill a troll, Hans merely quips, "I'm so sick of this shit."

On top of being genuinely hilarious and enjoyably tongue-in-cheek, Troll Hunter is truly exciting and interesting when it wants to be. The troll designs are undeniably hammy, yet the digital effects that bring them to life are incredibly vivid and realistic, allowing us to believe that these mythical creatures exist. Øvredal is a skilled filmmaker, too, as the various troll encounters are excellent, especially the awe-inspiring climax. But while the film is a rollicking good time for most of its duration, the final act suffers a tonal identity crisis. Øvredal suddenly takes certain things a tad too seriously, abandoning the light-hearted approach for no viable reason. As a result, Troll Hunter's new car smell wanes and it starts to feel as if the premise has been stretched out a bit too much. The tonal change also leads to a rather unsatisfying ending, though the brilliant post-movie captions close the door on a more positive note.

Troll Hunter's American remake rights were promptly snatched up even before it was released in the U.S.A., which is nonsensical. The transition from Norway to America is an impossible proposition since the story and all of the troll mythology are specific to Norway's cultural heritage, and there is no American equivalent. Mark my words: you must watch the original film before it is bastardised. Troll Hunter may be subtitled, but this low-budget gem is indispensable. It's easily the best, most inventive found footage movie in years.

7.9/10