Cars 2

'Cars' was always considered the lesser of Pixar's films. While it did well at the box office it was not as well respected as some of their other films. Despite that it is one of their biggest merchandising items. Hence we now get a sequel.

To me this is the influence of Disney finally reaching Pixar. In the past Pixar made films where they felt they had a strong story to back it up. But this film feels like it lacks the certain magic that other Pixar films have. Personally I've never been convinced of the whole 'cars behaving like people' concept. I probably over think it but I just could not buy into it as a believable concept. Which is why I was not all that pleased with the first film. This second film does a good job of expending the scope of the story by making it a globe trotting action adventure, but the basic story is still very conventional. You know exactly where it is going and nothing seems fresh. While most of the time that is not a problem, it would have been better if the journey was a bit more enjoyable. It was nice that the character of Mater got to be front and centre and he provides the story with many humorous moments. His naive nature though is conventional.

Owen Wilson takes a bit of a backseat in this story to Larry The Cable Guy. Larry is very good and provides a strong enough character to carry the film on his own. Michael Caine is very good as Finn McMissile but I think his casting is a bit obvious. Emily Mortimer gives a nicely sweet performance.

I suppose it was bound to happen that Pixar's stellar record of making brilliant animation would not last. The problems I have are mostly things that I have trouble with so others may feel better about them.

Nannerl, Mozart's Sister

Everyone has heard of the classic musician and composer Wolfgang Mozart. What many of you may not know is that he had an equally talented older sister.

This is another one of those true stories that makes for fascinating viewing. We get to learn about a person from history we did not know about that was connected to a famous historical moment. It is a shame when it is done in a non fascinating way. As is typical the reason Nannerl cannot be successful is because she is a woman and her father thinks more highly of her younger brother Wolfgang. So she is is forced to dress as a man to get her work recognized. But there does not seem to be any threat of her being discovered. This is what is lacking from the film in general which is a sense of jeopardy in that situation and just a sense of passion. It is all well and good that we see these people playing beautiful music but we don't get any emotion behind the music. What drove them to write this music? Why do they like music in the first place? I know that there is the fact that Mozart senior is driving his kids towards music by dragging them all over the countryside to have them perform. The film lacks emotion as director Rene Feret seems more preoccupied with telling events rather than the emotion behind them.

Rene is also a bit narcissistic as he has cast most of his family in the film. As Nannerl, Marie Feret is rather bland. She shows very little emotion and while good at performing music, I did not feel the passion for the music. Marc Barbe is suitably mean as the tyrannical father. Proving that stage you can find stage parents all through history. Clovis Fouin is the only actor to show any real emotion in his performance. He is suitably smarmy as the Dauphin. David Moreau is an excellent young performer of music as the young Wolfgang.

Possibly a film for true music lovers who want to find out more about a little known person from musical history. Lacks the passion to make the film as great as the music you hear.

Mr. Popper's Penguins

Is it just me or are penguins really popular at the moment. Hollywood seems to have finally discovered these cute feathered creatures and make movies about them.

Films based on thin children's books, to me, would be very hard to adapt. You have to basically create a story line that can sustain an audience for feature length. It all comes down to the type of director and writer you use. A couple of years ago daring director Spike Jones turned children's book 'Where The Wild Things Are' into a very daring film. Now plain director Mark Waters has turned this children's book into a plain film. This is an ordinary film with a plot that we have seen numerous times before and with not any original ideas. A workaholic father who learns to make time for his family is not new and seems to be a more popular theme these days. Add into that a teenager who he can't talk to and you have a very bland film. There is even the constant use of fart and poo jokes. Obviously the film is aimed at a very young audience who is not that discerning and so complex plots are not what they look for. And that is fine. But you do want a little more to help make it appealing for the adults who will be taking their kids to see the film.

I am a big fan of Jim Carrey. I have long admired him and his work. I admit that not all his films have been brilliant, but I do think he is an excellent comedic performer. It disappoints me that he has not really been able to make the leap into dramatic performance all that successfully. He has not been in many films lately and some that he has have not been good. I do have a great deal of respect for him doing 'I Love You Phillip Morris' as that is a very bold move for a mainstream actor to do. Here he gives a typical performance but we do get to see some glimmers of his brilliance. Sadly not enough to make the film great. The support cast don't do much. That has more to do with their roles and lack of depth to them. However it is always nice to see Angela Lansbury in a film.

I'm probably not the intended audience for a film like this. It is squarely aimed at young kids who are not too fussy.

Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 2

IT ALL ENDS!!!

As you will have read in my previous reviews, I'm not a huge fan of the Harry Potter series. I have only read the first four books and preferred to see out the series on the big screen. I know that I might loose some of the details but I don't mind. I saw the film at the midnight screening with a friend who is a huge fan. I think seeing it in this type of atmosphere helped to enhance my enjoyment of the film. That's not to say it is a bad film but it just made it more fun. This is essentially a great action film. The series has been building up to this final showdown and it is one big fight. It is really thrilling as Harry and his friends finally get to find out some of the secrets that people have been keeping. The one disappointing aspect of Part One was that they only found one Horcrux in the entire film. In this one though they find more and so the story moves along at a real fast pace. The other missing element from Part One was Hogwarts. It was great to be back at the school because it meant we caught up with some of the characters we didn't see in Part One. But the one surprising aspect for me was how emotional I found the film. There were some secrets revealed that let us see characters true intentions and we see them in an entirely new light. This bought more emotional weight to their outcome. There were a few disappointments. I was upset that one of Harry's friends had very little to do in the final battle. He only has what amounts to a small cameo. Considering how big an influence he was on Harry's life I expected him to feature more. The 'heaven' scene at the end came across as a bit cliched too. I did enjoy the 3D and there were a few scenes that were really enhanced by the added depth.

Daniel Radcliffe pulls out all the stops for his final dash as Harry Potter. He has certainly improved as an actor over the series and I will be interested to see how he goes now it has finished. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are also equally as good. They can certainly handle the action as well as the emotional parts. The two of them also have a really great scene that I am told is not in the book. One person I missed in Part One was Maggie Smith. But she more than makes up for it here with a brilliant scene when Hogwarts comes under attack. Ralph Fiennes is wonderfully evil as Voldemort and proves to be a really formidable foe for Daniel. My favourite though was Alan Rickman. Snapes true intentions are revealed and we come to care a great deal for his character. Alan's great skill makes you come to love this character. I was also pleased that actors with smaller parts like Jim Broadbent, Miriam Margolyes and the brilliant Emma Thompson.

A fitting end to an excellent series. I think fans will get more out of it than non-fans. There is however enough action and excitement for the non-fans to be excited. I can't wait to see it again.

Taxi Driver

'Are you talking to me?' is one of the most quoted and often sent up lines in film history. I have now finally seen the film from which it came.

This is another classic film that I'm ashamed to say that I've not seen until now. I have planned to rent it on DVD but never got around to it. Now I get to see it on the big screen then this is my preferred method of seeing it. It gave me the chance to concentrate on the film better and see its beauty. The film is a beautiful study of city life and how it can degrade and bring us down. It shows how there are sensitive souls out there who just can not handle city life. When they try to fit in they fail and then take out their anger on others. Travis Bickle is such a cleverly written character. He is obviously a troubled man but it is not a terribly obvious trouble. He can come across as charming but a little bit unsettled. While that can seem hard for people to take there are some who don't mind. Largely because they are so used to ordinary people that Travis's strangeness makes him unique. Travis's decent into madness is nice and slow too. While you know it is coming as he seems a little off, you never know when it will occur. He perceives the city as an unclean and sleazy place, which Martin Scorsese brilliantly brings to life. The cinematography and editing bring out the sleazier qualities of the city. Something which I think was not to hard to do in 1976.

Robert De Niro is long regarded as one of the greatest actors who ever lived and it is really easy to see why with this film. He is simply brilliant as Travis. Even as a young man his skills are easily seen. He us backed up by an equally brilliant cast too. We do not see much of Cybill Sheperd lately and so can sometimes forget what an excellent actress she can be. Albert Brooks brings some nice comedy to the film so we are not too unsettled. Jodie Foster is wonderful as the very young girl in an adult world. You can see why Travis wants to save her.

I can easily see now why this is such a revered cinematic classic. Considering it was made by a major studio it is something of the likes we'll not see any major studio releasing today.

Little White Lies

There is a long held tradition in films of a group of friends gathering together for an event and catching up on their lives. It usually involves the death of one member of the group.

Films about groups of friends gathering together will forever be associated and compared to 'The Big Chill'. While that is a good film, I much prefer the English version of 'Peter's Friends'. This film is similar to 'The Big Chill' in that these friends gather after one of the group is injured instead of dead. The problem is that this central point gets the film off to a bad start. It is quite selfish of the group to leave to go on holiday while their friend is lying heavily injured in the hospital. They reason their way out of the situation saying that their friend is so 'out of it' that he'd not know they were gone. It does however bring a sense of unease over the film as you loose some sympathy for the characters and the problems they are going though that we explore over the coarse of the film. The one interesting subplot involves one male character confessing his love for another male character. It makes for some good comedic moments and one excellent scene where they become trapped on a beached boat. But otherwise the other characters you don't really care for when they only care for themselves. There is also the fact that the film is much longer than it should be so the events drag on forever.

Marion Cotillard returns to her native France to make this film with her husband. She is usually a brilliant actress but is not given decent material here. Her character is thinly drawn and as mentioned you cannot feel sympathy for anyone in this group because of what they are doing. Francois Cluzet is very good as Max who is the object of desire for his friend. He plays the stress of his character really well which makes for some funny situations. The rest of the group is nothing special with each having a problem to deal with that while supposedly unveiling character traits just make them seem more selfish for leaving their friend alone.

A French attempt to make a friendship dramedy that fails with its basic premise. It would have been better if their friend had died at the beginning rather than become injured. Being too long does not help either.

Kung Fu Panda 2

It is summer in the USA which means Pixar and Dreamworks release their major animated films. Once again this year it is the battle of the sequels.

Dreamworks animated films, for me, have been very hit and miss. More miss than hit. While it might be unfair to compare them to Pixar but Pixar feel like they care more than Dreamworks. It is common knowledge that Pixar work diligently on crafting story above all else and you get that feeling in the films they make, especially when compared to those made by Dreamworks. Last year this changed when Dreamworks released 'How To Train Your Dragon'. A film that had a carefully crafted story with excellent characters. I initially was not expecting much from 'Kung Fu Panda 2'. One of the criticisms of Dreamworks is that they are more interesting in sequels and franchises than making interesting stories. I was then surprised at how much I enjoyed the film. The creators have managed to make a great action/adventure film with a great deal of emotion. The action is right up there with some of the best that Asian action films can offer. The makers have done their homework in making them look dynamic and a great deal of fun. The story of Po and his discovery of Kung Fu is an interesting one and in this film there is an added element of emotion as we find out where Po has come from. I think Po being a cute and cuddly panda helps as well. While how this story of Po's origins and how it fits in with the film's villain is predictable it is still effective. I thought the pace of the film was nice and quick too. The most important element for me though is that is the film funny? Yes it sure is. There are some really funny situations and lines in the film.

I don't think anyone could imagine a more perfect voice for Po than Jack Black. He exudes the plump and cuddliness of his real life character into that of this animated character. It helps that Jack looks like a panda in real life so that seeing him as Po is not much of a stretch. But he is also able to bring humour and emotion to his character that makes him Po more than just a kung fu fighting bear. Dustin Hoffman is very effective as his mentor and sadly has only a small role in this film. The only disappointing thing about Gary Oldman is that he once again plays a villain. He is however excellent at it. Angelina Jolie gives a nicely subtle performance as Tigress. Of the Furious five she is the only one who gets any decent screen time which is a shame. It would be nice for the others in the group to be more involved in the story.

A surprisingly good film that proves Dreamworks can make funny and engaging animated films with an emotional core.

Transformers: Dark Of The Moon

One of the most successful film franchises based on a toy returns to the big screen in another blockbuster.

I need to tell you a bit about my frame of mind before seeing this film so you know my reaction to it. I do not like director Michael Bay. He is probably my least favourite directors of all time. He made a couple of excellent action films at the start of his career with 'Bad Boys' and 'The Rock' (I'm not completely happy with 'The Rock' but I'm willing to forgive its one major flaw). Then after that he went steadily down hill. His bombastic approach has ruined lots of potentially great films. He also has no self control and makes his film run far too long so that they can be incredibly boring as well. Many critics complain that Hollywood films are only made for 13 year old boys. Bay is the perfect example of a director who caters to this market. While I thought that the first 'Transformers' film was fun it was not the greatest. The less said about the second film the better. Now onto the third. Again Bay has taken an interesting premise and blown it all out of proportion both literally and figuratively. I was really bored by this film. The story had the potential to be good but Bay's editing while quick within a scene is not quick as far as pacing of the story so events drag out and become dull. Huge robots taking over the world should be thrilling and exciting but Bay has made it ordinary. While the only good point I can make about him as a director is that he can make an action scene look good he has failed here. Especially with the fights between the Transformers. They were just the same old fight scenes we have seen many times before in the previous film. It did not look like Bay had tried to make the fights interesting. Perhaps there is only a limited number of ways you can film two robots fighting. I also felt that many of the supporting characters from previous films were wedged in unnecessarily. I now people like to see familiar characters but it would have been better if they had a good reason for being there.

Ever since Stephen Spielberg started mentoring the career of Shia LaBeouf I feel it has gotten worse. In the first 'Transformers' film he had a sweet nerdy quality that made him a more likable hero. But now in the third film he has gotten really annoying, arrogant and unpleasant. Not the type of hero that you can root for. His chemistry with his new female co-star is non existent as well. The only reason I can see them going out is because of a plot point and that she is very good looking. But in a Michael Bay film all the girl needs to be is good looking. John Turturro is one of the familiar cast members I liked seeing in this film. He has a great side-kick in Alan Tudyk as well. Patrick Dempsey makes a good bad guy even if his character motivations are a little weird. John Malkovich's character is very strange and he gives an equally strange performance. The one delight in the film though was Frances McDormand. She is such a skilled actress that she can elevate even the most lackluster material.

I have some deep seeded prejudices against this film that mean I did not enjoy it. I went in with incredibly low expectations and they were not elevated. I still do not like Michael Bay as a director and he has not proven himself any better with this film.

Oranges And Sunshine

In 1788 the British government began sending criminals to their colony of Australia. It seems that after almost 200 years they decided to start up again, but with children instead.

This is a pretty amazing story of how children were deported from England in the 50's - 70's. What makes it more amazing is that these were not orphaned children but ones that had been taken from their mother because it was believed she could not take care of them. I'm always amazed at how governments think that they can hide secrets like this. There is always someone who will uncover the secret. While they say that they were 'just doing it for the interests of the children' then why do they have to keep it a secret. Possibly because the people they sent them to in Australia mistreated them. This time the government is covering up the sexual exploits of the Catholic church. Margaret Humphreys an amazing woman who put her life on hold to investigate the lives of the children who were deported. Much like women who take on crusades she has to sacrifice time with her family to make this issue right. As a film the story is told well but is mostly a series of stories the people tell about their experiences of being deported. While this may not sound too interesting but director Jim Loach and writer Rona Munro have made it interesting. There were a few problems I had with character motivation but all up it is a decent telling of a terrible event in history.

Emily Watson is an excellent dramatic actress. While she can be a bit dour she is still very good at conveying the emotions of her character. She is also able to play the ordinariness of her character so you don't think of her as a superwoman despite the amazing things she is doing. Hugo Weaving is simply amazing in his role as one of the many people's stories we hear about. His character is sweet and charming and glad that Margaret is looking into his family history. He is balanced out by David Wenham who starts off as very unappealing guy who does not believe Margaret can help him to someone who becomes like a sidekick to her.

Not a terribly glamorous film but a good retelling of an atrocity in English/Australian history. Make sure you have tissues handy as well.