Michael Moore returns to the silver screen with a powerful, but clearly one sided anti-Bush rant which lovers of the leader of the 'free-world' will obviously hate, and those in the opinion that a six year old could do a better job will lap up gleefully. Unfortunately this fact saps a lot of strength from the films clear intention (to stop Bush getting voted in at the next elections), as the president's followers will refuse to watch the film and those on the other side are just being fed information that won't change their opinions at all. That said, it could change the minds of those sitting on the fence, but thats debateable. Anyway, intentions aside, Moore's documentary is very good, but a little bit of a let down when compared to his previous film, Bowling For Columbine. Both were one-sided, but I felt that Columbine brought forward some interesting ideas and startling facts, whereas Fahrenheit 9/11 is pure, angry Bush-bashing. Its still potent stuff though, and much of it is highly commendable, especially footage from Iraq showing a lot of things you wouldn't see on the news at home. The earlier scenes concerning the election that put Bush in office were quite eye-opening too. Later moments surrounding a woman who had lost her son in the war felt a bit exploitative though. Overall, its an important film that should be seen by a most of America, and is undoubtedly powerful, but at times its so one-sided and manipulative it almost feels like propaganda. 7/10
As was allegedly originally intended, Fantasia returns with one classic segment intact (Mickey in the Sorcerer's Aprentice) alongside several new pieces. Those familiar with Fantasia will know the score; famous classical pieces of music are accompanied with various animated sequences. I saw this on the IMAX which was an amazing experience, as you are totally immersed in the often beautiful artwork and animation. It has also been released on cinema, which I'm sure will be almost as good, but I advise everyone to try and find an IMAX version. I can't really remember the original well enough to compare them, but I certainly enjoyed this version a great deal. Although there are a few slightly too Disney like moments (the Donald Duck does Pomp and Circumstance sequence wavers a bit), on the whole this is an outstanding film with some superb music (Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue is one of my all time favourites) along with some stunning artwork (especially the finale - The Firebird Suite, which is breathtaking). Stay away if you weren't a fan of the original though, as it's basically the same thing. 8/10
This is basically what Gone in 60 Seconds was trying to be; a fast paced, very enjoyable car chase movie with minimal plot/dialogue etc. OK so its cliched and predictable at times, but it has it where it counts. The racing and chasing is great, mixing computer graphics and stunt work seamlesley (sp?) to create an adrenaline pumped experience that anyone who has ever wanted to push their Fiesta to the limit will appreciate. Vin Diesel is as hard as ever as the anti-hero and shoves the lead (Paul Walker) out of the picture whenever they're together. This is one of the films problems though, as Walker is on screen most of the time, and gives quite a weak main character. I can't really discuss this film too much, as it just does what it says on the tin, but does it well. French Connection this aint, but you're guaranteed to walk out wanting a street race with a big smile on your face. 6/10
It's quite a change to see the British film industry do an actual action film, but they could have done a better job. 51st state is one those films you enjoy, but can't help feeling that you're watching a very bad film. Well, very bad might be a little harsh, but the script is dire, the direction pedestrian and the performances far too hammy (Jackson and Carlyle are enjoyable though), and the less said about the shambles of a love story that was thrown in the better. Another problem that put me off a bit though was the sheer nastiness of it all. The violence was just a little too harsh in parts, not gritty, just nasty, and the profanity rate was ludicrous. I don't mind a bit of swearing in films, but this was just way too gratuitious (sp?) and did put me off at times. There is an element of fun here, but as with the Mummy Returns, its for the wrong reasons, its just a bit too dodgy. Basically, without Samuel L Jackson, this would have been terrible, but comes out as a (not really) harmless bit of fun. 4/10
David Fincher returns with another extremely stylish and dark film that studies the current state of masculinity. Fincher and/or writer Uhls certainly have a lot of ideas about this, perhaps too many for one film, but that doesn't stop it from being very thought provoking. As I mentionied earlier it's a very dark film, and I do mean very dark. The main character, Edward Norton goes to various self-help groups for testicular cancer, tuberculosis etc. to help his insomia, the other lead, Brad Pitt, steals fat from liposuction clinics to make his very popular soap, and in his spare time puts snuff frames in cinema reels for Disney films. Films don't get much darker than this, but strangely enough, the film is often very funny. This is an excellent, intelligent, and very cool film, that ranks in the top films of the nineties. 10/10
Another teen horror film rolls out of Hollywood, this time it's not quite a slasher/serial killer deal, but its still the same sort of thing (impecable clean cut American nice guys and galls fear for their life). However, it is quite well executed (bad pun), and as I said, it's not exactly the same as most teen horror movies. The aircrash scene at the beginning was quite impressive, and there are a few jumps (one in particular stands out, I won't give anything away), as well as plenty of gore (why was it a fifteen?). However, that aside Final Destination still falls foul to horror cliches, and lacks the wit of something like Scream and the scares of something like Halloween. There is an hilarious scene with the actor that plays the Candyman, whether it was meant to be funny or not is up to you, but I'm pretty sure it was. Other amusing scenes are the ludicrously contrived 'accidents' that result in the deaths of most of the cast. Overall, its predictable and over the top, but certainly entertaining. 6/10
Making films out of computer games is not usually advised in Hollywood (anyone remember Street Fighter or Mario Brothers?), but when it was decided that a Final Fantasy film would be made I was very excited. I am a big fan of the games, and what prevented me from getting worried was that the games are very filmic as they are, and so a move to the silver screen seemed an excellent idea. However, one of the main problems with the film is it lacks everything the games have - involving and ridiculous storylines and characters, huge creatures fighting each other, and dollops of magic and scorcery mixed with inventive sci-fi elements. The film, although technically gobsmacking, is just a cheesy sci-fi effort, saved by a couple of scenes slightly reminiscent of the games (the enourmous spirit creatures in the desert and later on are very cool). Also, although the textures, and most of the animation is definately groundbreaking and stunning stuff, the human characters just don't look human enough when they move and especially when they talk. Some of the scenes when the charcters have helmets on looks superb and almost real, but a lot of the time they just look a little wrong. Visuals aside, this is uninteresting stuff, with plot and dialogue straight out of a TV action cartoon. Whether you like the games or not, you'll probably be dissapointed, but if you switch off your mind for an hour and a half and watch the sheer beauty of it all, you'll at least stay interested throughout. 5/10
Pixar deliver the goods yet again with a delightful family film that children, adults, teenagers and anyone will enjoy. After the Toy Story films, Monsters Inc and the lesser, but still very good Bugs Life, Pixar really have been proving to be a force to be reconned with, and I wouldn't be surprised if they shed the shackles of Disney in the near future and set up on their own (they've certainly made enough money to do so). Thats enough about the company though, what about the film? Finding Nemo is a very well written and funny film with a gripping adventure-based plot. Okay, so you know how its going to turn out at the end, but like some of the earlier Disney Films and other adventure stories such as the Indiana Jones trilogy and some of the Miyazaki films like Castle in the Sky (or Laputa), you're totally drawn into the world and spend the whole film eager to know what will happen next. This is mainly because the characters are so likeable, and you really feel for their situation even though they are only cartoon fish! As well as being a well written and performed film, on a technical level this is magnificent. The computer rendition of life under the ocean is frequently spectacular especially in the early coral reef scenes, and as with the other Pixar films this contains some brilliantly constructed set pieces that are as tense as they are stunning.
All in all this is family fun of the highest caliber. Here's looking forward to Pixars next film. 9/10
While being far from a groundbreaking film, Frequency is still an enjoyable one. Starting off as a (little too) sentimental drama, the film later changes course to become more of a thriller. This is quite good, as too much of one or the other, unless done well, can be tedious. Both parts of this are done quite well, but the sentimental bits get a bit much at times and the twists and turns in the thriller section are pretty obvious. There are some good scenes though; the bits when Jim Caviezel's character talks to his dead father over the radio (the main premise of the story) are well done, as are the fire-fighting scenes. There are also some quite impressive visual effects, although some just appear unneccesarily. Some parts of the film are not so good though, there are some over schmaltzy scenes, and the tagged on extra ending bit is horrendous (it has to be seen to be believed). All in all, its an interesting idea, pulled out quite nicely, but with a little too much sugar and a disasterous ending. 5/10
(From Insomniac Mania)
Initally I was apprehensive about seeing this film as I was put off by the name, as far as i was concerned and film titled "From Hell" had to be mindnumbingly awful. So when I was talked into going to see it I was pleasantly surprised by the film. From Hell takes the tale of Jack the Ripper and one of the theories that has been produced to try and explain who he is and what his motives were. How much truth there is in the story and how much evidence it is based on I am not sure, but this is not really important as it makes a good film. We follow the detective first assigned to the case, Johnny Depp, and his efforts to solve itand find out who the killer is. I will not give much away, but you continually think you know which character Jack the Ripper is, but gradually your ideas are disproved and you are left having no idea who did it. The revelation as to who Jack the Ripper is keeps you guessing to the end and ends up being a very good twist. Robbie Coltrane is on fine form and the only real problem with the film is Johnny Depp's cockney accent, which seems to be entirely based on David Beckham! The film creates a good atmosphere of suspense and manages to avoid retreading into routine slasher territory by showing as little of the killings as possible. 8/10
Review by Daniel Fawcett
