Reviews by PvtCaboose91

Hot Shots! Part Deux is a textbook example of not only a film franchise which died too soon, but also of a sequel which eclipses its predecessor. While the original Hot Shots! mainly focused on Top Gun as a spoof target, Part Deux targets as many movies as could possibly be shoved into the screenplay. Once again written by Pat Proft and director Jim Abrahams, Part Deux is a tragically underappreciated near-masterpiece of a film spoof which provides more comedy than what should be legal. As he did with the original Hot Shots!, director Abrahams proved once again here that he knows how to craft a hilarious, enjoyable, satisfying, successful spoof.

What the original Hot Shots! did for Top Gun, this sequel does for the Rambo movies. Since being inexplicably dumped by his girlfriend Ramada (Golino), Topper Harley (Sheen) has retreated to a monastery to contemplate the meaning of life. His life of solitude comes to an end, however, when his good friend and former superior Col. Walters (Crenna) is captured by Saddam Hussein (Haleva), and Topper is approached to lead a rescue mission. Bumbling President Benson (Bridges) is in charge of the operation...but only when he can figure out what's happening. Along with a team of specialists, Topper parachutes into the jungles the Iraq/Iran border to save his old friend. On top of this, Ramada also returns, because, as she explains herself at one stage, she just had to be in the sequel. Of course, the plot is meaningless in the grand scheme of things, but there's enough here to sustain forward momentum and not too much to reach the point of tedium.

Hot Shots! Part Deux is one of the last funny spoofs of its time. In the years to follow, movie-goers would be subjected to brain-meltingly terrible and obnoxiously unfunny spoofs such as Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans, so it's refreshing to revisit these old gems and witness a time when spoof movies were genuinely clever. Of course, Proft and Abrahams refused to stop with Rambo, as the lampooning extends to dozens of other targets - Basic Instinct, Lady and the Tramp, The Godfather, Star Wars and even Terminator 2 are sent up as well, just to name a few. For crying out loud, in the space of 10 seconds the film manages to parody Platoon and Apocalypse Now, include a Martin Sheen cameo, and make a hilarious Wall Street reference. Not to mention, there's an on-screen body count tally which skewers Total Recall and RoboCop. This stuff is brilliant. The spoofing sequences are of course funnier if you are familiar with the source material in some capacity, but the uninitiated should at least find hilarity in the inspired silliness of the spoofing.

As to be expected, Hot Shots! Part Deux is just a fast-paced barrage of usually hilarious gags. The film is also superior to its predecessor because it feels more complete, with more laughs, simpler plot goals, as well as a tendency to go as insanely over-the-top as possible (seriously, the original Hot Shots! looks positively restrained in comparison). The mixture of visual gags, outright spoofing and amusing one-liners ensures Part Deux is infinitely re-watchable. And, naturally, it takes multiple viewings to catch all the subtle gags. Heck, Saddam's fridge takes a shot at about 10 American food products alone. As with the original film, the end credits also provide even more laughs. Another primary strength of Part Deux is that it's well-constructed, and the action sequences are genuinely good. Even if you watch the movie and do not find it too amusing, there's still a lot to enjoy here. The only flaw is that the first half-hour is not as well-paced or as hilarious as the rollicking final 50 minutes or so.

To the actor's credit, Charlie Sheen bulked up impressively to reprise his role as Topper Harley. With his unbound hair, bulging muscles and tonnes of guns and ammo, Sheen looks eerily similar to Sylvester Stallone from his Rambo heyday in the '80s. The role called for Sheen to mix his cocky and tough guy images and meld them into a dim-witted buffoon. Suffice it to say, Sheen succeeded tremendously. Sheen and co-star Valeria Golino were also able to wade through the proceedings with gloriously deadpan expressions; always playing the material straight no matter how outlandish the film becomes. Satire often works best when it's intentionally modelled after terrible drama. Also in the cast is Richard Crenna, who was called upon to parody his own role from the Rambo movies and is frequently amusing as a result. Lloyd Bridges, who featured in the original film, is once again a show-stealer here as the dumb-as-rocks president. Added to these guys is the hilarious Ryan Stiles, who plays a role here that's completely different to the character he played in the original film. Look out for Rowan Atkinson too - he has a very small role, but is nonetheless amusing.

Hot Shots! Part Deux is not high-brow humour. Rather, it's gut-busting low-brow humour that will appeal to the part of the brain which craves stupidity. When you combine effective low-brow humour like this with hilarious spoofs of other movies and genres, it's a winning combination. Because of it, Part Deux is a hit. Those who enjoyed the original Hot Shots! or other '80s spoof movies will doubtlessly be entertained and amused by this follow-up. It's dumb, random, over-the-top, silly fun - and at a hair under 85 minutes, it's short and sweet, too. It's definitely worth at least a rent for a beer and pizza night with friends.

8.0/10

2009's The Loved Ones is a delirious Australian mash-up of various movies, including Carrie, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Prom Night and Pretty in Pink, with perhaps a slight dash of Mad Max also thrown in for good measure. Several critics have also dubbed The Loved Ones as "Pretty in Pink meets Wolf Creek", and that's another fairly accurate analogy of this frightening yet resonant exercise in genre dramatics - it represents an amalgam of teen alienation issues with serial killer film lore and torture porn tendencies. In an era beset with ineffective, toned-down, politically-correct horror movies, writer-director Sean Byrne stuck to his guns with The Loved Ones in order to deliver a visceral, disturbing, compellingly watchable, fiercely original blast of film terror.

A high school student named Brent (Samuel) is a depressed shell of his former self who's prone to self-abuse after being the driver in the car accident which killed his father. Struggling to cope with his life as well as his mother's emotional collapse, the one bright spot of Brent's existence is his girlfriend Holly (Thaine). Brent plans to take Holly to the end-of-school dance, but the meek, awkward school loner Lola (McLeavy) asks Brent to be her date. Brent politely declines, but this unfortunately turns out to be the biggest mistake he's ever made. See, whatever Lola wants, Lola gets. The unhinged Lola kidnaps Brent with the assistance of her equally unhinged father (Brumpton) in order for Lola to have her own special night with Brent...

The Loved Ones definitely succeeds as an unnerving horror movie, but it's also a crafty, effective "race against the clock" kidnapping thriller. By distilling the plot to its bare essentials and refusing to bog down the proceedings in extraneous exposition, writer-director Byrne has crafted a lean, taut and disturbing scare-a-thon. Throughout the film, Byrne contrasts the horrors of Brent's ordeal against the night being had between Brent's friend Jamie (Wilson) and the school's resident "Goth girl" Mia (McNamee). To some, this subplot may seem extraneous, but it relieves the tension at strategic moments in addition to highlighting the tragic fact that Brent is unable to have a memorable night with his beloved girlfriend. While making the film, Byrne's self-professed mantra was "If you don't care, you don't scare". Accordingly, he created real characters you can care about, and as a result the film is intense and gripping throughout.

In addition, The Loved Ones follows in the tradition of such films as Deliverance, The Hills Have Eyes, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and Wolf Creek in the sense that it exploits the fear that on the fringes of civilisation there are poor, disturbed people who get their kicks from torture and murder. If you're even remotely squeamish, you had better skip The Loved Ones - this is a highly disturbing, gory horror outing. The gore effects are stomach-churningly real, and you will likely squirm in your seat and cover your eyes at certain points. Eventually a trapdoor unleashes the full force of Lola's house of terror, and the surreal universe assumes a nightmarish sense of the macabre. This stunning reveal was handled with a commendable self-assuredness that belies Byrne's lack of feature film experience. In addition to the harrowing and disconcerting content, inspired strokes of dark comedy emanate from both the audacity of the violence as well as the supplemental story about Mia and Jamie. Topping this off is Simon Chapman's crisp cinematography which is permeated with mood, and the well-chosen soundtrack. The film even makes unforgettable, haunting use of Kasey Chambers' song Am I Not Pretty Enough?.

In the role of Brent, Xavier Samuel is eminently likable. It's easy to root for him to escape throughout his ordeal, and thus cheer each time he strikes back at Lola and her father. The real star of the show is, undoubtedly, Robin McLeavy as Lola. McLeavy has created a screen psychopath that can easily rank alongside Norman Bates, Patrick Bateman and Annie Wilkes. Due to the passion and focus McLeavy brought to the role, the performance transcends that of a one-note monster. Particularly brilliant is the way she seems so quiet, shy and easy to miss at school, but her true colours come bursting through once Brent is in her clutches. Meanwhile, John Brumpton is fantastic and darkly humorous as the very sick Eric Stone (Lola's father) who has a borderline incestuous relationship with his daughter. The chemistry between McLeavy and Brumpton is strong, and it rings true that they love and need one another. Also of note in the cast are Richard Wilson and Jessica McNamee as Jamie and Mia (respectively), both of whom are believable in their roles. Rounding out the main cast is Victoria Thaine who functions as a beacon of warmth playing Brent's girlfriend Holly.

Admittedly, a few stupidities are littered throughout The Loved Ones, most notably that it's a tad unrealistic that Brent still has strength despite enduring so much torture. The final scene is amazingly cheesy as well. This aside, The Loved Ones is a solid Aussie horror offering. There are so few contemporary horror films that actually have something to say, but The Loved Ones manages to do just that. It has been imbued with relevant social implications, including the repercussions of grief, the indestructible hold that parents and children have on each other, and the fiery wrath of high school females. This subtext speaks to the universal nature of high school experiences. After all, high school girls are among the most emotionally volatile creatures on the planet, and high school boys must constantly try to avoid igniting the powder keg of drama. This is emphasised by the fact that Brent is nice and respectful to the shy, seemingly harmless Lola, but nonetheless pays dearly for rejecting her. The film is therefore an exaggerated depiction of the instability of teenage emotional states.

8.2/10

The stereotypical Hollywood comedy formula receives a bad wrap on a frequent basis, but this is only because the formula is too often implemented poorly. However, there are exceptions. If a film sticks to the status quo and does it right - hitting the expected story beats with wit and grace - the result can be as thrilling as a wholly original motion picture. Fortunately, 2010's Morning Glory is one of these rare occurrences. Written by Aline Brosh McKenna (27 Dresses, The Devil Wears Prada) and directed by Roger Michell (Notting Hill), this is a fast, smart, clever, frequently laugh-out-loud funny film. It's also fascinating due to its juicy, seemingly authentic examination of the goings-on behind morning news shows. The plot sounds like 2006's The Devil Wears Prada with a liberal dosage of 1988's Working Girl, and this is a fairly accurate analogy of Morning Glory.

Fired from her job as the producer of a morning television program, 28-year-old workaholic Becky Fuller (McAdams) begins to wonder if her professional dreams will ever come true. After flooding all nearby television networks with résumés, she ends up taking a gig out of desperation despite a subpar salary. Her new job is as the executive producer of Daybreak; a fledging talk and morning news show which is currently lagging behind all the heavy-hitters. Desperate to make a quick impression on her new boss (Goldblum), Becky begins implementing ambitious ideas, and brings in cantankerous veteran newsman Mike Pomeroy (Ford) to provide a fresh face for the show. The trouble, however, is that Mike wants nothing to do with Becky or Daybreak - he is instead forced to contractually endure his hosting duties, and does so with the bare minimum of enthusiasm. With the show's almost certain demise on the horizon, Becky looks to shake up the stale old routine by making the show fun and exciting, while at the same time attempting to nurse a burgeoning relationship with fellow producer Adam (Wilson).

In the vein of the dark Broadcast News and the groundbreaking Network, 2010's Morning Glory is a film which takes a peek behind the curtain of television newscasts; revealing that everything is not as tidy and ordered as it appears on the air. The behind-the-scenes material is superb; depicting the daily show meetings, the goings-on within the control booth, the interoffice banter and sparring that transpires, and the imaginative ploys which are implemented to raise the ratings. Despite the seemingly dull nature of this material, it's all immensely watchable, and the determined Becky is an easy protagonist to like. Added to this, Morning Glory has an assured spring in its step, which was visually supplied by Michell and cinematographer Alwin H. Kuchler. The antics are therefore provided with a delightfully crisp appearance, peppered with careful compositions and a delightful soundtrack which adds a welcome whimsical feel. It's an appealing movie with a vital cinematic personality to prevent it from sinking into the doldrums.

Some may be concerned to see Aline Brosh McKenna as the credited screenwriter. While The Devil Wears Prada is satisfying enough, McKenna's other credits include 27 Dresses, Laws of Attraction and Three to Tango, none of which are exactly glowing displays of talent. McKenna's usual downfall is attaching troublesome romantic anchors to otherwise pleasing comedies. While this is retained in Morning Glory, these flavourless antics only harm the film to a minimal degree since the rest of the picture exhibits wonderful comedic flair. Despite its adherence to the traditional Hollywood formula, Morning Glory generates enough entertainment, good feeling, and genuine laughs to make it difficult to dislike. Becky's enthusiasm is consistently infectious, and it's fun watching her revitalise the ailing Daybreak.

The strongest point of Morning Glory is the cast. Leading the ensemble is Rachel McAdams who's positively luminous as Becky; proving yet again what a terrific, underappreciated comic talent she is. Effectively conveying fear, compassion and Blackberry-immersed distraction, the star is a credible television wrangler whose diminutive size reinforces the daunting nature of the task ahead of her. It helps that McAdams is incredibly attractive, as well. As for Harrison Ford, he's an absolute standout. Ford's hard, cold exterior and antagonising delivery could not be better suited. Not to mention, Ford is a wonderful sparring partner for McAdams. Also in top form is Diane Keaton as Daybreak's long-time anchor Colleen, who is side-splitting when she's given adventurous news segments to appear in. Meanwhile, Jeff Goldblum is his usual strong self. Rounding out the cast is Patrick Wilson as the love interest for McAdams. Unfortunately, Morning Glory is at its worst when it concerns itself with Becky's love life - her romance with Adam is lifeless, and this subplot is murder to the pace.

By predominantly shying away from the news vs. entertainment question which lies at the centre of the film, Morning Glory is unable to make the leap from a good comedy to a truly great one. Though with its light-hearted disposition, Morning Glory was probably never intended to be anything brilliant. Rather, it's a well-executed, genuinely enjoyable studio comedy. A tougher, more penetrating treatment of the same premise would've been welcome, sure, but what we have instead is a breezy movie that will leave you smiling and satisfied. Sometimes, that's worth a recommendation.

7.3/10

The Terminator is one of the most important motion pictures of the 1980s, as it launched the career of visionary director James Cameron and catapulted Austrian bodybuilder Arnold Schwarzenegger to stardom. Cameron went on to helm several groundbreaking blockbusters in later years (Aliens, Terminator 2, Titanic, Avatar, and so on), while Arnie developed into a legendary big-name action star with such movies as Commando, Predator, Total Recall and The Running Man. 1984's The Terminator spawned these two Hollywood legends for good reason - this is one of the most remarkable, original science fiction/action films in history. Unhindered by its modest $6.4 million budget, Cameron put every cent of the financing to great use, resulting in several memorable images and set pieces. Crucially, The Terminator is pitched as more of a horror movie, with Schwarzenegger depicted as a genuinely terrifying and intimidating presence that seemingly cannot be stopped. Benefitting from still-impressive special effects, remarkable performances, ample excitement and a mesmerising pace, The Terminator is one of the greatest movies of all time, and it remains the best instalment in the Terminator franchise.

In 2029, humans are at war against the machines. Leading up to the global nuclear war, tech company Cyberdyne Systems set up an artificially intelligent defence network called Skynet, based on a neural net of learning computers. However, when the system becomes self-aware, it strikes against humankind and nearly wipes out the planet's population. In 1997, on a day known as Judgment Day, three billion human lives were lost in a nuclear holocaust triggered by Skynet, and only small pockets of human resistance are still alive. Their only hope is human resistance leader John Connor, who encourages his fellow survivors to fight back in coordinated attacks. Consequently, Skynet has practically lost the war and is on the brink of extermination. To reverse this outcome, Skynet sends a humanlike cyborg - a T-800 model Terminator (played by Schwarzenegger) - back in time. His mission is to exterminate John Connor before his birth and entirely prevent his existence. The Terminator is sent back to 1984, and his target is John's mother, an innocuous waitress named Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton). However, the Terminator is not the only one to enter the time portal. To protect his mother from the ruthless cyborg assassin, John sends a soldier, Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn), back to 1984 to destroy the indestructible Terminator.

Cameron and co-writer Gale Anne Hurd structure The Terminator as an extended chase, with the vulnerable Sarah and Reese perpetually on the run from the relentless Terminator. Of course, Sarah initially distrusts Reese, but a bond gradually forms between them that develops into a romance. The Terminator is as lean, economical and relentless as its antagonist, but Cameron nevertheless allows us to get to know Sarah and Reese, and grow to care about them and their relationship. There's plenty of expository dialogue to explain the Future War and reveal more about the Terminators, but it's usually provided during intense chase sequences, conveying critical information without boring viewers to death. Thanks to these aforementioned characteristics, a question will constantly linger in the mind: can the Terminator be stopped? This generates the hard-to-nail asset of tension, keeping your eyes glued to the screen and keeping you thoroughly engaged in the proceedings.

The Terminator's key strength is combining action with ambitious ideas, making it feel more substantial than a run-of-the-mill, turn-off-your-brain collection of fights, shootouts and car chases. The plot involves time travel and its inherent paradoxes, requiring viewers to pay attention or risk being lost. Additionally, the circumstances surrounding the Future War are especially thought-provoking, especially in the 21st Century with advances in technology and artificial intelligence. As demonstrated in several of his movies, Cameron is a filmmaker able to incorporate provocative sociocultural themes that blow you out of your seat, thrilling your heart and mind. The Terminator is no different. However, noted science fiction author Harlan Ellison sued Cameron in the years following the film's release, claiming that The Terminator bore more than a passing resemblance to an Outer Limits teleplay of his. While the similarities are arguably insignificant, the settlement resulted in Ellison gaining an undisclosed amount of money and an acknowledgement of his works in the end credits.

The Terminator was produced for a relatively paltry sum, yet the believability of the sets and effects (mostly) belie the production's low-budget nature. Cameron constructs a stunning, chilling vision of Earth's bleak future here, and the movie is exceptionally atmospheric throughout. The Future War sequences remain the best in the franchise because they are pitched as dark, harrowing and scary, and the film's rough-around-the-edge grittiness beats the glossiness of subsequent instalments. Late great special effects guru Stan Winston was responsible for the Terminator effects, and while some shots are dated, there are many impressive effects sequences throughout. Admittedly, the Terminator endoskeleton movement during the climax looks somewhat phoney, but the film's other attributes are solid enough to overcome such shortcomings. The soundtrack is largely impressive, as well, with booming sound effects and Brad Fiedel's effective synth score. The main Terminator theme is particularly outstanding and memorable.

In 1984, Schwarzenegger was a star with limited acting experience, but he had precisely what Cameron needed: a relentless countenance and an imposing physique. Schwarzenegger's Achilles heel was convincing dialogue delivery, but this was no impediment in the case of The Terminator. After all, the role called for him to be an emotionless cyborg that kills without compunction, with a binary code governing his actions and attitudes. Arnie's deadpan voice affords an unnerving edge to the limited dialogue he delivers. Additionally, Schwarzenegger's ability to effectively immerse himself into the role makes his performance so memorable; he looks perpetually stoic, focused and in the moment. The Terminator is also the movie that introduced Arnie's catchphrase, "I'll be back." Meanwhile, the film's other two leads - Biehn and Hamilton - are highly impressive, with their relative inexperience never showing through. Both of them are charismatic, physically adept, and suitably intense. The love story between Kyle and Sarah is believable thanks to the excellent leads, and this romance makes the film both raw and emotional.

Upon release in 1984, the film's distributor - Orion Pictures - did not give The Terminator a large marketing push as they perceived it as a small, niche-market action film. As it turns out, they were wrong - the film was #1 at the box office for two weeks and earned more than ten times its production budget. Like its titular villain, The Terminator is relentless in tension and action. With its thought-provoking premise, it engendered a new era of sci-fi/action films, and it has never been surpassed or equalled by any of its imitators. The Terminator stands as a profound reminder that action movies can provoke an on-screen adrenaline rush without short-circuiting the brain. The film's success eventually led to numerous sequels, beginning with Terminator 2: Judgment Day in 1991.

10/10

Following the immense success of Airplane!, Top Secret! and The Naked Gun!, along came 1991's Hot Shots!; a spoof movie imbued with the same type of punch lines and the same type of humour, and which was aimed at the same audience. Of course, the similarities are no coincidence, as the mastermind behind Hot Shots! was none other than Jim Abrahams, who collaborated with David and Jerry Zucker to create the aforementioned comic gems. Following the golden days of the ZAZ trio, David Zucker focused on the Naked Gun! sequels while Jerry helmed the sappy chick flick Ghost and Abrahams pursued Hot Shots!. Clearly, Abrahams realised that the typical ZAZ trio parody formula was successful, so he did not deviate from it even slightly. Thankfully, even without assistance from the Zucker brothers, Hot Shots! is a consistently hilarious, superior spoof.

Hot Shots! is primarily a send-up of Top Gun. The film is to Top Gun what Airplane! is to Airport movies, what The Naked Gun! is to television cop shows, and what Top Secret! is to Elvis Presley and World War II spy movies - Hot Shots! is basically The Naked Top Airplane Gun Secret!. As for the plot? A Tom Cruise type named Lt. Topper Harley (Sheen) is a flashy young hero who was kicked out of the Navy. Several years afterwards, the Navy want Topper back for some type of secret mission. Once Topper agrees and leaves his tee-pee (don't ask), he soon finds himself in competition with the corps' egotistical flyboy (Elwes) and in lust with the base's resident psychiatrist (Golino). But who cares about the plot, anyway? The flimsy premise is just an excuse for a bunch of gags.

In his review of Scary Movie, Roger Ebert noted that spoofs are the hardest genre to write about, and this sentiment is spot-on. The point of reviewing a film is to assess a number of factors, such as story, characters, and cohesiveness, none of which matter in the case of spoofs. The only thing that matters are the jokes, and a reviewer cannot write about these jokes because they're best left unspoiled. Thus, it boils down to one thing: is it funny? If the answer is no, the film has failed. If the answer is yes, the film is a hit. In the realm of parodies, you either hit the nail on the head or miss the mark. Thankfully, Abrahams hit the nail on the head - Hot Shots! is absolutely hilarious. The film is nothing but a rapid-fire succession of silly jokes, but the jokes are uniformly hysterical.

Hot Shots! takes as many pot shots as possible as quickly as possible; setting its sights on as many targets as possible. Naturally, not all of these gags are home runs. Yet, the jokes are delivered at such a swift rate (without rhyme of reason) that if a joke falls flat there is still another gag right around the corner which is bound to provoke a smile, a chortle, or an outright guffaw. As with most films of this ilk, Abrahams and co-writer Pat Proft (Police Academy) chose to parody as many pictures as they could get away with - Top Gun was the main target here, but sights were also set on The Godfather, 9½ Weeks, Cocktail, National Velvet, Gilda, Gone with the Wind, Rocky, Casablanca, Superman and numerous others. In addition to the outright spoofing, Hot Shots! is rife with background detail. In order to catch all of these little nuances, multiple viewings are necessary. Heck, there are even a tonne of additional gags present throughout the credits.

Nobody should judge a film like Hot Shots! based on acting, but the acting is surprisingly good here. Charlie Sheen is unexpectedly funny when he wants to be, and for this film he truly proved that he has great comedic timing and slapstick skills. Sheen was accompanied by a fine supporting cast here, including Valeria Golino as his romantic interest and the always-amusing Cary Elwes as his rival. Lloyd Bridges (who also featured in Airplane!), meanwhile, is an absolute scene-stealer; exhibiting flawless comic timing, and delivering a plethora of memorable, hilarious lines. Also look out for Ryan Stiles (of Whose Line Is It Anyway? and The Drew Carey Show fame) in a small role as 'Mailman' Farnham.

Admittedly, Hot Shots! bogs from time to time, and the humour is not exactly on-par with the greatest gags from Airplane!, The Naked Gun! or Top Secret!. Nevertheless, the film offers a substantial amount of amusing gags to compensate for the slower patches. Hot Shots! is the type of movie you watch with a bunch of friends, a huge bucket of popcorn, and a decent amount of alcohol. And you will be quoting it for weeks. It is good, clean fun without being too garish, vulgar or offensive. For fans of spoof movies by the ZAZ trio, you cannot afford to miss this one. Oh, and look out for the Chihuahua! Eventually, the movie's success led to a sequel: 1993's Hot Shots! Part Deux.

7.7/10

As hard as it may be for some to believe, there were films about the sinking of the R.M.S. Titanic prior to James Cameron's 1997 Academy Award winner. These films have taken different points of view of the disaster, with some closely adhering to the factual record (1958's A Night to Remember) and others using the sinking of the ship as an secondary event to a human story (James Cameron's Titanic). Jean Negulesco's 1953 version of Titanic falls into the latter category. Yet, it's hard to judge 1953's Titanic after viewing the 1997 version since Cameron's gem represented a perfect marriage of the ship's luxury, the disaster, and an affecting melodrama worthy of the ship's undying legend. While Negulesco's rendering has its moments and features a finale that captures the emotional devastation of the passengers, the experience is ultimately underwhelming. Due to it having been lensed in black and white (though colour was available), Titanic fails to capture the glamour and excitement of being aboard the grand ocean liner; making it feel like just a humdrum drama set aboard a doomed ship.

The historical details of the R.M.S. Titanic were reduced to a minimum for this version. Much like its 1997 counterpart, Titanic uses the tragic sinking of the titular luxury liner as a backdrop for a drama about a few fictional characters. Instead of a pair of young lovers, though, 1953's Titanic concerns a middle-aged couple whose marriage is ending. Julia Sturges (Stanwyck) has booked passage to New York on the Titanic for her and her two children, Annette (Dalton) and Norman (Carter). Her plan is to begin life anew in America and away from the upper class formality in Europe. By leaving, Julia also hopes to separate her children from her rigid, by-the-book husband Richard (Webb). Richard, however, is unwilling to submit to such a plan, and follows in hot pursuit; obtaining a ticket on the doomed liner at the very last minute in the hope of bringing the family back together. The film chronicles their trials and tribulations until the Titanic collides with an iceberg. The rest, as they say, is history.

Despite the soap-opera melodrama, the dialogue and acting are decent enough to keep the movie afloat for the most part. Stanwyck and Webb managed to afford real poignancy to the scenes of their dissolving marriage, yet it's hard to understand Julia's standpoint: why would she separate her and the kids from a man who spoils his offspring? In addition, the historical inaccuracies are blatant and difficult to ignore; from the shockingly inaccurate, subpar ship interiors to the depiction of the sinking. Even more baffling is the absence of such key characters as Thomas Andrews (Titanic's designer) and Bruce Ismay (owner of White Star Line), both of whom played pivotal parts in the Titanic story. On top of the corny melodrama is an out-of-place scene in which the doomed passengers all sing "Nearer My God To Thee" as the ship begins to plunge beneath the waters of the North Atlantic. It's somewhat effective, but blatantly Hollywood. Due to the above, it's difficult to label this as a picture about the sinking of the Titanic. 1958's A Night to Remember and 1997's Titanic are far superior and more accurate depictions of the tragedy.

Inexplicably, the fate of the titular liner is not sealed until over an hour of the 95-minute runtime has elapsed, and consequently the film is rather dull. The special effects are not all that impressive in the 21st Century, but the model ship is astonishingly detailed, and the composite shots portraying the lifeboats rowing away from the Titanic do look convincing. Added to this, the occurrences on the deck of the ship during the sinking are admittedly well-staged. In particular, the loading of the lifeboats still grips at the heart. The fact that the hubris of the White Star Line caused such a surplus of unnecessary deaths is hard to swallow no matter which dramatisation you're seeing. Yet, the utter chaos and tragedy of the sinking was greatly simplified here - in A Night to Remember, lifeboats rowed away half-empty, and men were permitted access to some of boats while others were held off at gunpoint. The ship sinks impossibly quickly in this retelling, too, with the Titanic's three-hour sinking flying by in under half an hour. The filmmakers behind 1953's Titanic were evidently more concerned with the drama about the Sturges as opposed to staging a faithful recreation of the great ship's demise.

In the role of Julia, Barbara Stanwyck is magnificent. Alongside her, Clifton Webb basically plays himself but is nonetheless effective. Webb's scenes with Stanwyck are mature, graceful and marvellous to watch. Even more impressive are the sinking scenes in which Richard moves heaven and earth to get his family into a lifeboat. Also in the cast is Thelma Ritter, who had a field day as the character seemingly based on the Unsinkable Molly Brown. Meanwhile, Robert Wagner and Audrey Dalton are excellent as Gifford and Annette (respectively), who gradually become romantically involved over the course of Titanic's voyage. Wagner is handsome and effortlessly charismatic, while Audrey is gorgeous.

Over the years, there has been a lot of controversy over the fact that Titanic earned an Oscar for its screenplay (written by Richard Breen, Charles Brackett and Walter Reisch). To this day, the decision is bewildering - the script is pedestrian at best, though the dialogue is admittedly impressive from time to time. This reviewer would not go as far as to call Jean Negulesco's Titanic a true classic, but it's nonetheless a solid (if shallow) disaster movie. Yet, A Night to Remember depicted the disaster with more dignity, and James Cameron did it with more passion, spectacle and emotion, making this 1953 version a historical curiosity rather than anything more substantial.

5.8/10

With the Hollywood remake machine surging through European countries unabated, none shall be spared, with Let the Right One In and now The Dinner Game having been reinvented for Westerners. By and large, remakes of this variety are completely unnecessary as they are merely produced to ensnare audiences who are resistant to embrace foreign films in their original form (i.e. with subtitles). It's surprising, then, that Dinner for Schmucks is in fact a constantly uproarious comedy benefitting from an ideal cast. However, it's not perfect. A Hollywood remake of the French film The Dinner Game, Dinner for Schmucks features a mean-spirited premise which should have paved the way for a hysterical black comedy. Instead, the film is too soft and formulaic, not to mention overlong at about 110 minutes. If edited down to 80 or 90 minutes and if it was armed with an edgier script, Dinner for Schmucks could've been one of the highest comedic points of 2010. Luckily, there's nonetheless a lot to enjoy here.

At the centre of the story is Tim Conrad (Rudd); a morally conflicted but well-meaning financial analyst on the verge of receiving an important promotion. During his daily work meeting, he impresses his boss (Greenwood) by pitching an idea involving rich a Swedish magnate (Walliams) which could bring big profits to the investment firm. In order to further prove himself to his boss, Tim is invited to a secret monthly dinner in which the top brokers bring along the funniest idiot they can find and spend the evening making fun of their guests. Inwardly, he's against the idea - so, too, is his girlfriend Julie (Szostak) - but then fate drops a huge idiot named Barry (Carell) into Tim's life. A lonely IRS employee who screws up any situation with his earnest behaviour and who creates dioramas with dead mice, Barry is the perfect choice for the gathering of morons. However, Barry is so overexcited by the dinner invite that he shows up to Tim's apartment a full day early and subsequently ruins every facet of Tim's life.

To the credit of those behind Dinner for Schmucks, the film kicks off with one of the most endearing opening credits sequences you will ever see - a montage of Barry building his dioramas with stuffed dead mice; showing the rodents in miniature play-lands as they indulge in love and whimsy. The brilliant Beatles song The Fool on the Hill plays over this sequence, and it's a pitch-perfect way to open the movie.

Dinner for Schmucks serves up plenty of laughs and a sufficient amount of heart, but it's never as cutting or as dark as it should have been. In fact, this could be the safest mean-spirited comedy in history. Although it initially seems that the film is headed for dark comedy territory, it eventually settles into the groove of a middle-of-the-road screwball comedy. Moreover, the final act lays on the moral backbone stuff a little too thickly; playing to a generic studio agenda. The "warm, fuzzy" feeling this generates ultimately undermines the potential for Dinner for Schmucks to be a brilliant black comedy. Additionally, the tone is rather schizophrenic as we're encouraged to laugh at the idiots while also feeling bad for them. Thus, the filmmakers were less interested in alienating viewers with excessive cruelty than they were in taking the characters along a familiar journey for which every single plot point is predictable.

Prior to Dinner for Schmucks, director Jay Roach had been responsible for two highly successful comedy franchises: the Austin Powers movies, and Meet the Parents and its first sequel. Once again, Roach demonstrated here why he is one of the best comic directors in the business. Roach has a gift for comic timing and is deft at endowing his projects with energy. While it's at times slow, the film is constantly enjoyable nonetheless. The film's primary asset is the relatively unpredictable ridiculousness - you will never know what Barry-created disaster will befall Tim next. And the actual climactic dinner sequence is hilarious. Dinner for Schmucks is a very funny movie, though some of the humour is derived from awkward situations that will make you cover your eyes and feel uncomfortable. Not all of the uncomfortable comedy works, but, when it does, it's hilarious.

In the film, Rudd plays his umpteenth straight man, yet he suits the role. However, the true star of Dinner for Schmucks is Steve Carell, who's pure magic as Barry. The star managed to make the role so simultaneously likable, infuriating, brave and pathetic. On top of this, Carell struck the right balance between childlike innocence and full-on obnoxiousness which was so integral to making the character work. Zach Galifianakis (The Hangover) also features here as a bearded weirdo who claims to be able to control people's minds. Fittingly, Galifianakis is the only performer who comes close to topping Carell. Watching Carell and Galifianakis square off is pure genius. In addition, there's an amusing Jemaine Clement as a self-absorbed artist, and comedian Jeff Dunham as a ventriloquist (how suitable) who attends the titular dinner. Meanwhile, Lucy Punch (Hot Fuzz) is sinfully funny in the go-for-broke role of Darla; a former one-night stand of Tim's who is completely obsessed with him and is keen to rekindle what she perceives as a flame. And to round out the most notable members of the cast, David Walliams is a total riot as the wealthy Swedish magnate.

David Guion and Michael Handelman's script for Dinner for Schmucks had great potential to go further with the dark comedy, but somewhere along the line it was decided to keep the proceedings light and PG-13 to allow for maximum box office profits. However, it's saved by an inspired cast, most notably the show-stealing Steve Carell. Without Carell, Dinner for Schmucks would have been just another abysmal Hollywood attempt at remaking a foreign film for Westerners. But with Carell, the film is exceedingly watchable and constantly hilarious.

6.1/10

In all likelihood, the Best Animated Feature Oscar should be renamed the Disney-Pixar Excellence in Animation Award. No other animation production house has, with any regularity, managed to equal or top Pixar's dizzying heights of brilliance, nor have they met Pixar's ambitious standards. There are pretenders and contenders, but Pixar continues to set the bar by which all other animated features are judged. Due to this, 2007's Ratatouille was burdened with high expectations. Added to the pressure was the fact that 2006's Cars was Pixar's first bad movie. Thankfully, it would appear that Cars was just a one-off anomaly, because Ratatouille is just as funny, joyful and heartfelt as anything Pixar has ever produced. Comparing Pixar's Ratatouille or Toy Story with the likes of, say, Kung Fu Panda or Shark Tale is like comparing fine wine with light beer - both have their surface pleasures, but the former bestows many additional delights.

Remy (Oswalt) is a rat with a highly developed sense of taste and smell who dreams of becoming a chef. He idolises now-deceased French chef Gusteau who preached a motto which Remy took to heart: "Anyone can cook". Through a curious set of circumstances, Remy becomes separated from his clan. However, Remy is delighted to discover that he is in the heart of Paris directly across the street from Gusteau's once-renowned restaurant. Helpless to resist exploring the kitchen, Remy ends up putting his own unique spin on a soup which fast becomes popular with the restaurant's clientele. Credit for the soup goes to a dishwasher named Linguini (Romano) who is the only one to notice Remy's talent. With pressure mounting for Linguini to replicate his soup and create more dishes, Linguini and Remy strike a compromise: Remy will use Linguini as his puppet during cooking, and nobody will know that a rodent is responsible for such fine food.

Naturally, it's easy to be disgusted by the notion of a rodent being a chef who handles food that humans will eat. However, writer-director Brad Bird chose to exploit the shaky convergence of the rodent and human worlds in order to revive one of the oldest, most reliable narrative staples in family-movie history: the misunderstood outcast who flourishes when he finds his unique niche. Additionally, Ratatouille could be perceived as a parable about racism and tolerance. The conflict is between humans and rats, and the breakthrough arrives when members of each species learn about members of the other. Ratatouille is endowed with sweet moral values - messages about love, friendship, family and understanding. The final twenty minutes of the film are particularly triumphant, with a climax that's moving and meaningful. A food critic (O'Toole) emerges as the film's ostensible villain, but Bird's handling of the role is unpredictable and genuinely surprising, as well as indicative of the film's humanity.

Prior to Ratatouille, Brad Bird helmed Pixar's 2004 hit The Incredibles along with The Iron Giant and episodes of The Simpsons. Fortunately, Bird's deft touch is evident throughout Ratatouille. Bird - who also wrote the script - did not give into easy gags or forced humour, but rather opted to develop the story with a light touch and let the comedy emerge organically. While Bird allowed for a few frantic chase sequences, they were pulled off with such finesse that they register as necessities rather than distractions. There are no song-and-dance numbers in the movie to enrapture the kids, but there's plenty of comedy that's universal enough to tickle the funny bone of viewers of all ages (not to mention there are the aforementioned chase sequences, too). However, Ratatouille is admittedly long for an animated feature, with a runtime of roughly 110 minutes. It's not as sluggish or weighty as Cars, but there are a few slow patches.

Among the first thing a viewer will notice about Ratatouille - or any Pixar movie, for that matter - is the computer animation. It seems as though the animation keeps getting better with every picture that Pixar produces. Ratatouille offers borderline photorealistic backgrounds, in addition to thoroughly detailed character depictions, though the characters are still recognisably cartoonish. Since this is a Disney movie, the animators emphasised the "cute" aspects of the rats (the round pink nose and the wide, innocent eyes), but there can be no mistaking what they are. All the food looks real enough to eat, as well. Ratatouille is simply a marvel to observe.

The voice talent present in the movie combines tried-and-true names from Pixar's stable (like John Ratzenberger) with such actors as Ian Holm, Brian Dennehy, Peter O'Toole and Janeane Garofalo. Patton Oswalt is especially outstanding as Remy - he's passionate and unafraid, and his line delivery is so matter-of-fact that his outlandish statements seem to make sense. Lou Romano (previously seen in Cars voicing Snotrod) is also perfect as the perpetually awkward Linguini. Brad Garrett (armed with a French accent) is equally remarkable as the legendary Gusteau, while O'Toole is memorable as the egotistical food critic. Like all of Pixar's movies, the stars were chosen not on the basis of how they sell, but on the basis of whether they suit the role they've been allocated.

Clocking in at almost two hours in length, Ratatouille demands a longer attention span than most animated movies. In many ways, it's probably too sophisticated for younger children as well. Yet, the movie rewards those with patience; offering a number of impressive set-pieces, big laughs and plenty of heart. Ratatouille has that old-world movie magic - it's the type of movie that you watch as if you were a child again, but with the appreciation of an adult.

8.9/10

Not everyone may share the same opinion, but this reviewer immensely enjoyed Paul W.S. Anderson's Death Race. It's cinematic junk food, sure, but the big dumb fun aspect and the expert action sequences made it easy to dismiss the cold critical heart in this reviewer's chest and forget that critics are supposed to hate exploitation films like it. Despite its disappointing performance at the box office, 2010's Death Race 2 eventually moved forward. The title is rather misleading, however, since this is not a sequel but a prequel - it deals with the genesis of Death Race, the beginnings of the legendary Frankenstein, and why Frankenstein has to keep his identity a secret at all times. Despite being a low-budgeted direct-to-DVD/Blu-ray sequel, Death Race 2 delivers massive explosions, beautiful gals, bloody violence, exhilarating car carnage, colourful villains, and thrilling race sequences. And it's all delivered with slick cinematic techniques and absolutely no pretensions. It would seem we've reached the point where direct-to-DVD/Blu-ray no longer means cheap crap.

Before Frankenstein became a legendary star of Death Race, he was Carl "Luke" Lucas (Goss); a getaway driver working for notorious crime lord Marcus Kane (Bean). Following a bank job gone awry, Carl takes the fall and decides to do the time rather than testify against Kane. He ends up on Terminal Island Penitentiary which has been acquired by the profit-seeking Weyland Corporation. In the search for another source of profit, Weyland (Rhames) and his slutty assistant September Jones (Cohan) organise a show called Death Match in which inmates fight to the death. However, the ratings begin to decline, so the ante is raised when Death Match is scrapped in favour of a new game; the more epic Death Race. The island is transformed into a racetrack to host the multiple-day pay-per-view event, in which nine drivers compete to gain their freedom. Luke joins the competition, and, in true Death Race fashion, earns himself an attractive female navigator named Katrina (Phoenix).

Working on a scant $14 million budget (less than one third of the budget of 2008's Death Race), Dutch director Roel Reiné did a fine job of making Death Race 2 look like a far more expensive film than it is. Reiné's directorial talents were put to great use here; he managed to craft several exhilarating races and slick action sequences throughout (as opposed to The Marine 2, in which Reiné's competent technique was hampered by a dire script). The action is not as plentiful or as over-the-top as it was in the original Death Race, but this is by no means Jane Austen - there's still ample violence and gore to satiate action lovers, and the film flies by at a terrific pace. Death Race 2 is vehemently old-school as well, with practical effects and real stunts as opposed to masses of CGI. Also worth noting is that Paul Haslinger returned to compose the accompanying score, which is a huge asset. The catchy main theme of 2008's Death Race makes a welcome appearance here. While this film is not 100% on par with its predecessor, there's still plenty to enjoy about Death Race 2. The film's dénouement even leaves room open for further sequels. Awesome.

As thrilling as the action sequences are, screenwriter Tony Giglio's dialogue is not a strong suit, and character arcs and nuances are practically non-existent. For instance, Lucas feels guilty over killing a bank guard, but this is neglected for the remainder of the film. And sure, there are a few conveniences and narrative shortcuts as well. For instance, the transition from Death Match to Death Race is done in less than a minute with barely any introduction. The task of prepping Death Race seems like a task as simple as visiting the local shops since there are no montages or dialogue scenes to reveal the timeframe between Death Match's end and Death Race's beginning. Luke's transition to Frankenstein is rather forced and truncated, too, though his actual introduction is absolutely badass. Of course, none of these quarrels will affect one's enjoyment of the movie since this merely affords a brisk pace, but some additional material would have been welcome.

While the cast of Death Race 2 is not brimming with A-listers, the majority of the actors who were assembled for the film at least exert enough genuine talent to ensure the film is not the direct-to-DVD/Blu-ray nightmare it could have been (who associates DTD with anything but crap?). A couple of minor characters from 2008's Death Race even returned to reprise their roles here - Robin Shou as driver 14K, and Fred Koehler as Lists (a member of Luke's pit crew). Meanwhile, the main role of Carl Lucas was played by Luke Goss. Surprisingly, Goss is an affable leading man - not exactly in the same league as Jason Statham, but nonetheless assured and badass. Other notable actors appearing here include Ving Rhames and Sean Bean. Rhames is his usual awesome self, while Bean chewed the scenery with every line delivery as the villain of the film. Danny Trejo also appears, but he phoned in a strangely neutered performance (made all the more heartbreaking after 2010's Machete). As the trademark eye candy, Lauren Cohan and Tanit Phoenix are terrific. Not that their performances are terrific, mind you - they are just delicious to look at.

Death Race 2 is probably pretty easy to criticise if you approach it with the mind of a self-absorbed film snob. But who cares? This reviewer knows a fun movie when he sees one. Death Race 2 is brimming with irresistible B-movie charm which shows that Dutch filmmaker Roel Reiné and screenwriter Tony Giglio clearly understood the appeal of Paul W.S. Anderson's Death Race reimagining, and possessed the creative and technical know-how to replicate it on a much smaller budget. For fans of Death Race seeking another round of awesome mayhem, Death Race 2 definitely delivers. In fact, this direct-to-DVD/Blu-ray gem easily surpasses several 2010 blockbusters which polluted theatres.

7.4/10

Note: If you are not familiar with the story of Aron Ralston and wish to be surprised by 127 Hours, it is advised that you watch the movie before reading this review. Spoilers of sorts are scattered throughout.

In mid-2003, Aron Ralston developed into a media sensation when he became trapped in a canyon for 127 hours, and was forced to amputate his arm in order to save his life. Ralston's physically and spiritually transformative experience was chronicled in his 2004 book Between a Rock and a Hard Place, and has now been dramatised to harrowing effect in Danny Boyle's 127 Hours; the director's follow-up effort to his Oscar-winning Slumdog Millionaire. Unflinching in its depiction of what constitutes the will to live, 127 Hours is at once ruminative and frenzied, intimate and vast - it's a thoughtful, compelling character study, yet it's as energetic as its protagonist. Although the film bears little resemblance to Slumdog Millionaire, 127 Hours was largely created by the same crew: Boyle co-wrote the script with Simon Beaufoy, Anthony Dod Mantle contributed to the camerawork, and Indian composer A.R. Rahman wrote the score. It's a testament to the talents of these men that - superior craftsmanship notwithstanding - you would not guess the connection between the films unless you had prior knowledge.

Aron Ralston (Franco) is a skilled hiker who craves solitude; usually avoiding family and friends to embark upon adventures and be king of the wild. At the start of the film, Aron is bound for Blue John Canyon in Utah. Initially, he encounters a pair of lost female hikers (Tamblin and Mara, in what amount to cameo appearances) and helps them find their way before he speeds off to his next claustrophobic destination. Unfortunately, he meets a loose rock along the way, and subsequently finds himself at the bottom of a narrow crevice with his right arm trapped between a boulder and the canyon wall. The title refers to the amount of time Aron spends in the crevice with very limited food and water; enduring freezing nights and the growing realisation that no-one is coming to save him.

In adapting Ralston's memoir, Boyle and Beaufoy took what could have been the man vs. nature equivalent of torture porn and transformed it into a visceral drama about life and hope. 127 Hours is brilliantly crafted - it's an at times gruelling, but nonetheless deeply compelling study of the lengths a person will go to for survival. For the majority of the film it's just Franco, Boyle and the canyon - there are no scenes of concerned friends or relatives wondering where Aron is. Nevertheless, there's never a boring moment. As time continues to drip along, flashbacks reveal Aron's early life, and, as dehydration and fatigue take their toll on his mental state, he experiences dreams and hallucinations. Aron gradually comes to regret his antisocial behaviour; wishing that he spent more time with loves ones before the hour of his impending death. Aron has a camcorder with him too, and records a constant video diary of his thoughts and experiences with the hope that it will be returned to his parents. (In real life, Aron did record a video diary, though he never showed it publically. In preparation for the movie, Boyle and Franco were allowed to view it.)

Boyle has always been skilled in terms of his stylised shooting style, and this talent is evident once again in 127 Hours. The director and his duo of cinematographers - Enrique Chediak and Anthony Dod Mantle - chose to depict Aron's struggle through a complex series of edits and shots; creating a fluid sense of movement by switching between shooting styles despite most of the film being set in one claustrophobic location. Boyle loves to splash the screen with visual flair, and this creates an exhilarating experience which places the viewer inside Ralston's head. Perhaps the most effective sequence is the climactic arm amputation scene. Viewers have reportedly vomited while watching said scene, and it's easy to understand why. Boyle did not baulk at capturing the gory details - Aron is seen breaking the bones of his forearm and using the dull knife of a cheap multi-utility tool to cut the soft tissue. Especially with Rahman's harrowing score, the scene is almost unbearable to watch. Although less gruesome than Hostel or The Hills Have Eyes, the reality of the scene is what makes it disturbing. The film is also topped off by an uplifting conclusion which packs a tremendous wallop; elevating this challenging picture to unexpected emotional heights.

James Franco is an actor who, up until now, has always tried his best but never achieved anything truly remarkable in his career. He has always displayed an enthusiasm for acting and a degree of charisma, but these qualities were perpetually lost on thankless supporting roles. Thankfully, 127 Hours denotes Franco's first truly remarkable piece of acting work. Franco is on the screen for nearly every frame of the movie (often in close-up), and he was up to the challenge; delivering the performance of a lifetime, and overturning his reputation as a dramatic lightweight. For more than an hour, we're stuck in a hole with Aron, and the intensity and charm of Franco's performance keeps us engaged. It's a tribute to everyone involved that, despite being aware of the true-life story, a viewer will still hope that Aron will make it out of the canyon in one piece, and be hopeful whenever he attempts a new technique.

127 Hours is a cracking, extraordinary movie. It may be hard to imagine how a movie with such limited scope could remain interesting for over 90 minutes, but Boyle and his talented team managed to pull it off. In fact, the only disappointment is the film's brevity. Another full half-hour should have been added to truly drive home the period of time for which Aron is stuck. In spite of this, 127 Hours is a masterpiece. It's even superior to Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire. If a film can be both brilliant from a critical perspective and mighty entertaining, it's a miracle.

9.5/10