The Island          ***

I very rarely enjoy watching films with Euan MacGregor in them but he definately excelled himself in this film. It is yet another science fiction futuristic setting where not everything is as it seems. It had a better plot twist than aeon flux but the costumes were much worse. Very few people can look good in white  jump suits! Another improvement on Aeon Flux were the much more believable action sequences which destroyed a pleasing number of vehicles and some rather large explosions. Most reviewers did not rate this film particularly highly but I was impressed.

Aeon Flux           **

I was rather looking forwards to this film from the creators of the matrix. It did have a very impressive styalised view of the future, a sort of crysalids vs george orwell utopia where not everything is as it seems. The plot twist was just so obvious and overused and the acting was a tad wooden. OK, very wooden. Excellent costumes though, as long as you like black lycra. Slick, if a tad unbelievable, fight sequences. Mainly all girl action, i wonder who this film is aimed at ...

Fun with Dick and Jane     *

A disappointing, cringe-worthy comedy. My other half enjoyed it but I fear I just could not believe the situation in which Cary and his screen wife find themselves in. There is some great slapstic and some almost clever plot twists. But very little redeams this almost-funny comedy for me. http://www.michmog.com/michmog/films/reviews/#funwithdickandjane

The lion the witch and the wardrobe     ****   

A magical journely into that imaginary snowy world where animals talk and humans are revered. The adult actors are marvelous with mister thaumnus being the most sexy faun I have ever cast eyes on and Tilda Swinton simmering as the evil queen. Unfortunately the children do not fair as well. The youngest does very well but all she has to do is cry so it really is not that challenge. Edmond is very good at playing the detestible one and Susan is adequate at her average character, the script really does not help her characterisation. But Peter is extremely disappointing. It is probably more the fault of the script which drifts away from CS Lewis's classic novel towards a more sappy after-school-special theme.

My real question is whether this really adds anything to the wonderful BBC version of the Chronicles of Narnia. The BBC series was a landmark television series featuring some very early CGI alongside more traditional models. The new film advances this much further so the animals really look like real animals. But to my oppinion this is about all it adds.

Harry Potter - number 4     ***

The latest in the Harry Potter saga which is netting warner brothers millions. It was good wholehearted action but even at its length three hours it still missed out lots from this tome of a book. And there is none of the quidich world cup!!! or that other poor house elf! Hermionie remains the only character who has truely blossomed into her role and although the other kids have improved since that first hideous film they remain desperately unemotional at times. Can't complain at the dragons though.

Underworld Evolution     **

Am I missing something or was this prity much the same as the last underworld? Plot that you can't quite understand, crazy vampires, and a lot of running away? The only difference was that this time kate beckinsdale actually gets her kit off (hence the 18 rating). The action scenes are a lot better - it was almost like kill bill one with supernatual creatures. But there is little else to recomend in this film. 

King Kong     ***

There is no denying that Peter Jackson is now the god of large budget action epics. Steven Spielberg has finally found a rival. Sorry, did I say large budget? I meant huge, enormous, king kong sized budgets. King Kong is an epic of epic preportions. It is not only the gorila which is oversised, there are also the dinosaurs, and the bats, and the insects. Eurgh, the insects, the insects ... the nightmares are all too apparent.

What I do wonder though is whether it was all really necessary. This epic film is epically long and there really is not much to the plot. It was well acted, well directed, well edited and the special effects were marvelous. But perhapse it could have all been better spent on a film with a more interesting plot.  

Kill Bill Volume 2  ****    The Website

Quentin Tarantino was garanteed to create a classic film in this, the second part of his Kill Bill duo. After the blood gushing, action packed samouri/manga/kung-foo thriller that formed Kill Bill Volume One, he did not leave himself many genres left to experiment with. I for one had not expected to be greeted by Uma Thurman as a nineteen fifties black-and- white belle instead of the cold blooded psychopath we had come to know and love. But, again he skillfully wove together his scenes of action and explanation into a tantilising tale

In the past I had always felt very strongly that Uma Thurman was a disapointing actress who made up for her lack of tallent with stunning good looks. However, it seems that I was terribly wrong. Throughout both films she terrified us with her relentless cool, calm, cold blooded killer. Her delightful performance made up for some of the other less enthusiastic performances. It seems that the female actors in both films have been far superior to those select few males.

The only thing that disapointed me about this film was the dire lack of violence. Tarantino headlined at the Cannes Film Festival with his desire to create "the most violent film ever" but Kill Bill Volume 2 was a depresingly mild mannered sequel. Violence in films has never been an issue for me as, amongst educated adults, there is no better place for it. However, as it stands, I don't think Volume 2 can be classed as a true sequel. It is more of an alternative version of the first film for those who perfer acting to sword action. I had hoped for more balance between the two films. Nevertheless, the new expereince that is Kill Bill Volume 2 is one that cannot be missed.

Will Mr Tarantino ever go too far? Will he forsake the enjoyment of the cinema goer for his desire to shock the watcher? I fear he came close this time. There is a delicate balance between creating a classical masterpiece which delights those that apreciate the artwork of the director and also your average Joe Bloggs at the cinema.

Nice one Mr Tarantino - but will you go too far?

Shawn Of The Dead      **     http://uip.co.uk/romzom

This is the latest British comedy to hit the screens. And wow - did it hit with a bang. I am a fan of Simon Pegg's hit TV series Spaced - and was delighted to see so many of his co-stars appearing in this film - along with some well chosen additions (Dylan Moran, Bill Nighy).

This is the ultimate zomby-spoof with the most wonderfully half-hearted zombies on the planet. Despite its tendency to drag in the middle, I still think this film deserves its rave reviews and I would give it 7/10.

The Terminal     **

Tom Hanks is a god. Hs acting ability is unsurpassable. He has come many leagues from the romantic comedy type-cast of Sleepless in Seatle (one wonders what happened to Meg Ryan’s career … ) and proved what he was capable of with the timeless Forest Gump. At the moment he is just churning out these delightfully light hearted films where he places his emphasis squarely on his major strength, characterisation.

The Terminal is not a laugh a minute comedy, nor is it a strict comment on moddern society. It is merely 2 hours of mild humour with a small amount of tear jerking pitty. It tells the tale of a charming foreigner who becomes stranded in an American airport terminal and how his good nature and determination helps him survive. If you have ever been lost in a foreign country where you cannot speak the lingo then you will empathise with this film. In short, it is the film that Lost in Translation should have been. Of coarse there is the typical brash uncaring American in charge of airport immigration (played expertly by Stanley Tucci) and there is the usual troop of lovable friends. My favourite character is undoubtedly the psycho Indian cleaner (Kumar Pallana) “do you have an appointment?” Catherine Zeta Jones plays the sideline love interest but, thankfully, this is not a major part of the movie.

At the crux of the film is a very poignant attempt to scorn America’s strict immigration laws. In keeping with the laid back atmosphere of the film, this theme is not pushed particularly hard. Nevertheless, you do leave the cinema with an uncontrollable urge to be more understanding to your fellow man, no mater what accent they have.

Lost in Translation     *

It it would be impossible to say that I do not appreciate movies that I do not enjoy. If you accuse me of this I will simply  site this film as an example. I have never come out of a cinema so miserable in all my movie-watching years.

It probably did not help that I went to see this film at 11:30 after an evening of drinking in the pub and my other half fell asleep after about 5 minutes of dreary introduction (lucky him). So a film about being lonely probably wasn’t the best thing for me to see when I was the only awake person in a several hundred-seater cinema.

I don’t think anything actually happens in this film. Then again, I don’t think anything is supposed to. And if the director’s main aim was to make his audience miserable then he certainly succeeded. The two main characters play delightfully off one another creating an atmosphere of pure uneasiness. There is the middle-aged-alcoholic-once-famous actor and the shy-unfocused-girl both in the same hotel. Both are attached and neither knows their direction in life. It’s the sort of thing that smaks of real life, the sort of stuff that you are at the cinema to avoid.

It is the sort of film I would only recommend it to my enemies. However, anyone who can make me this miserable deserves the acolade. Just don’t make me watch it again.

This is the latest in the long running set of Alien and Predator movies. What could be better than combining the two classic scarry sci-fi action films? Well, unfortunately the answer to that is, a lot.

This was a disappointing attempt to cash in on a classic genre. Firstly, it ripped off major amounts of plot from the classic sci-fi film Cube. Secondly, the cast jumped to conclusions so rapidly that the viewer was struggling to keep up. Thirdly, what happened to the terrifying who is going to die next chases and battles? The only good thing in this film were the monsters themselves. Too bad the humans let us down. They lacked character and substance and I really didn’t care wheather they lived or died.

I wonder if Alien vs Predator 2 will be any better?

Do not go to the cinema to see this film with a bag of sweets. Or a hot dog. Or pop corn. Or anything resembling food. You will not eat it. Furthermore you will soon feel violently ill. Above all, do not take a McDonald’s meal into the cinema.

This is the latest in a series of docu-films which have been sweeping to our movie screens. In common with its predecessors (bowling for columbine, farenhieght 9/11) it is no doubt a highly biased and extremely sensationalist piece of journalism. However, even when you view it in this light, some of the statistics and medical findings are very unnerving. I can’t help feeling relieved that the supersizeme meals with a gallon of cola are no longer available.

The all important question is, will I eat at McDonald’s again? I think the answer has to be, yes. As easy and vaguely edible food goes, I can’t complain. However, I have learnt a valuable lesson: you should not live of McDonald’s meals. Ummm?? Wasn’t that obvious already?