Let Me In

Sweeden is having great success at the moment with films. Besides the hugely successful Millennium trilogy a few years ago we got 'Let The Right One In'. Now of course we got the Hollywood remake.

I saw 'Let The Right One In' a last year, just at the height of the 'Twilight' phenomenon. 'Let The Right One In' was everything that 'Twilight' was not as far as a vampire film goes. Vampires are meant to be vicious creatures that feed on blood. Not sparkly brooders who act like they have had their fangs clipped. If vampires were real then this film shows how you'd expect a relationship to develop. I was not too concerned about the remake and Matt Reeves has done an excellent effort. However, I still think the original is better. Matt does not get the tone quite right. It is not one of those things that you can pin point but he is not able to capture the mood you felt in the original. He has also made a few changes to the plot which are both good and bad. One change meant he left out my favourite sequence from the original. There are however some great things here. There are several sequences I was quite impressed by.

One other thing that Matt got right was the casting. Kodi Smit-McPhee is fast becoming an accomplished young actor. He puts in an excellent performance as Owen making him seem really vulnerable and sweet. The other wonderful young actor Chloe Moretz. She too is versatile in bringing out the two sides of her character. Being able to play the sweet innocent looking girl and then the viscous monster that is the other part of her. Richard Jenkins while being a pretty obvious choice is still excellent.

By all means go see this film to see how a real vampire falling in love with a human story should be told. But also put aside your prejudice of subtitled films and see the original to see the same thing done to perfection.

Chloe

Canadian director Atom Egoyan likes to make smart intelligent adult thrillers or dramas. This time he tries his hand at a remake of a French film.

I first became aware of Atom when he was nominated for an Oscar for his film 'The Sweet Hereafter'. I thought it was an excellent film and soon came to admire him. This film while not as good as some of his previous work is still a good film. The story has been done a few times before so there is a certain amount of familiarity to it. I suppose the whole lesbian thing is a bit new as you normally don't see that happen in other films. It is the two relationships in the film which drive it and I found interesting. You are constantly wondering what Chloe's motives are and why she is seducing and manipulating Catherine. It is very similar to 'Fatal Attraction'. Then there is Catherine's relationship with her husband David. I quite liked how that relationship develops and ultimately resolves.

Julianne Moore is such an amazing actress. She is so versatile in the roles she can play and does an excellent job in all of them. Julianne is once again excellent here. Liam Neeson has the difficult role of being the unfavourable one in the film. You may not come to like him completely you still like how his character grows. The big surprise is Amanda Seyfried. Most of her films lately have been light fluffy stuff, so it is nice to see her do something meaty and with a bit of substance. It nicely shows her acting skills.

The attraction of this film for most people will be the sex scenes. But it is also a great erotic drama that has a good story and interesting characters to back it up.

The Social Network

Hollywood loves a great social phenomenon. And you can't get one better than Facebook and the story of its creation.
I have to say upfront that I have little bias with this film. I am a huge fan of both the writer and director of the film. David Fincher is one of my all time favourite directors. Aaron Sorkin is one of my script writing heroes and 'The West Wing' is one of my favourite TV shows. You can tell right from the opening scene that this is an Aaron Sorkin film. The wonderful quickly spoken dialogue that brilliantly sets up what type of guy Mark is. Despite being the an unlikable type of guy you are able to become interested in his life and what he does. There are really two stories behind Facebook and this is one of them. The other one would be more documentary style and looks at how it became so popular. While the film looks at the creation of Facebook it is more of a profile of Mark Zuckerberg. The project he is working on could have been anything. As I said he does not come across as a very nice person but the story is fascinating enough that you want to know what happens. What you don't realise is that Mark's whole story is one big revenge story. Most Hollywood revenge stories involve a guy going out and shooting a whole heap of people but this one is the nerds version. Instead of shooting people he builds a hugely successful web site. The film does not have much by the way of action and is just a series of scenes of people taking but with the brilliant dialogue by Aaron Sorkin you don't mind. David Fincher does not use many technical flares to tell the story except for one character. There is one brilliant scene I loved of a rowing race that was a brilliant use of editing and music.

I've been a fan of Jesse Eisenberg since one of his first films 'Roger Dodger'. He is brilliant at playing nervous and charming nerds. He does that here as well but much better and in no way charming. This is sure to be a breakout role for him and possibly be in awards contention. The new Spider-Man, Andrew Garfield is excellent too. I've been rather impressed by the choices that singer Justin Timberlake has made as an actor and this is one of them. He really impresses here. The biggest surprise for me though was Armie Hammer. I did not know until I saw the credits later that he played both of the Winklevoss twins in the film. That's a testament to his performance and the special effect department.

The moral of the story is for girls that if you break up with a guy or turn him down you may end up causing him to become one of the richest men on the planet. Another brilliant film from the one of the best directors working today. Also affirms my love for Aaron Sorkin.

The Town

Actor Ben Affleck until recently had a bit of a dip in his career with a string of flops. Then he changed tracks and directed 'Gone Baby Gone'. Now he is a success again.

I think that sticking to his home town of Boston has helped Ben in the direction of his films. He lives and knows the people that populate his movies, so he can bring a unique perspective to the film. You really feel like these are very authentic characters. Real people with real lives. Which helps with this film especially as the plot is very familiar and a little predictable. But when you have great characters like this you don't care. You come to care about these people and what happens to them despite the fact you have seen it done before. Ben has certainly upped the stakes with his direction too. He handles the action scenes in this film with great care. They are really tense and thrilling.

Being an actor himself, means Ben can get excellent performances out of his cast and himself. This is one of his finest roles in recent memory. As mentioned before he knows the type of character he is playing very well so can dig into past experiences to draw out the authenticity. Jeremy Renner was brilliant in 'The Hurt Locker' and does it once again here. He played a nice guy before and is now a really nasty character here and shows his range. Rebecca Hall is always fine and is fine here too. Jon Hamm continues to make excellent career choices here. I was also quite impressed with Blake Lively.

A wonderfully acted drama that while fairly familiar is brought together by some brilliant characters. Make sure you check it out to see why Ben Affleck is more than just a pretty face.

Legend Of The Guradians: The Owls Of Ga'Hoole

In 2006 Australian special effects company Animal Logic made the brilliant animated film 'Happy Feet'. Now this is their follow up film.

Zack Snyder is a director I've come to admire for some excellent films he has made. But I have been disappointed by his first effort as an animation director. I do not know what it is but I could not get into this film. It seems to have all the elements of a great story with epic qualities. However for me it lacked the spark to make it great. I found it all rather boring. None of the characters interested me and one in particular which I'll speak of later. The story has all the elements of being special but I just did not come to care about what goes on or what they do. I think it would have helped if we got to see more of The Guardians. Soran the young owl who worships these heroes gets told the stories by his father. It would have been great to see these stories acted out rather than jut heard about. It would have meant we care about finding The Guardians as much as Soran does. It would have also helped to know a bit more about the world that these owls live in. There appears to be some sort of hierarchy and system in place but not much is explained. It is also never really explained why The Guardians are in hiding and only some out when called. You would think that if other owls are in trouble they would be on the look out for it. The one big omission though is the flecks. The evil owls collect little flecks of silver and seem to bring them together to make this 'device' that disables other owls. How does this work? What are the flames or rays that radiate from it? What does it do to its victims? None of it is explained.

The lead character of this film Soran is voiced by actor Jim Sturgess and I feel is one of the worst voice performances I have seen ever in an animated film. I've spoken about other problems I've had with the film but this is by far the worst. Jim is over acting so badly the it completely ruins the film for me. It is however nice to hear Aussie voices in the supporting cast and all of them are by far significantly better than their leader.

The potential for a brilliant film is there and there are many great elements but I think it is squandered so badly. It also features one of the worst voice acting performances I've ever heard. Zach Snyder needs to stick to his live action films in future.

Detective Dee And The Mystery Of The Phantom Flame

It is probably not the right thing for me to do but I do rely on film critics advice if a film is any good. There are two particular critics whose advice I particularly rely on and they gave rave reviews for this film so I made sure I went to see it.

One of the things that the Chinese can do really well is grand epic films that look brilliant. The use of the latest CGI helps but they also have wonderful costumes and sets. The opening scenes of the film with the tour of the Buddha statue are amazing. Looks are all well and good but don't mean anything if they don't have a good story to back it up. This film certainly has that. I'm a big fan of detective films so I loved the story here and the many twists it takes. It is kind of like a Chinese version of Sherlock Holmes. Then there are the great action sequences. Wire work is now how action scenes are done which gives them such a grand ballet look. There is one underground fight scenes that was simply amazing in the way they use the set to fight with. The use of the mystical is integrated into the film really well too.

Andy Lau is no stranger to being a detective after the brilliant job he did in the 'Infernal Affairs' trilogy. He is excellent here too as the stoic detective who hates authority. Chao Deng makes an excellent assistant to our lead. He is very much like Dr. Watson and makes a good doubter to the methods Dee employs. Carina Lau gives a very regal performance as the Empress and is suitably nasty.

You could easily see someone making a Hollywood remake of this film. It would also make a great story for Sherlock Holmes. Make sure you go see this very original piece of work before that happens.

Buried

Let's spend 90 minutes in a box with Ryan Reynolds. See what happens when one man is buried alive and has to use a mobile phone to help get himself out.

This is a very brave film. Being able to sustain a story for 90 minutes when all you see is one man in a coffin. He does have a mobile phone to talk to the outside world and must negotiate his way out of it. Which is where the thrills lie. It is a bit of a gimmick to do something like this and the skill is in trying to sustain it for as long as you can. I think writer Chris Sparling and director Rodrigo Cortes do a very good job of keeping you interested for the films length. But the problem is that you are constantly thinking about the concept and not getting involved in the story. I was continually thinking about what would happen next to keep things going and not being involved in Paul's story and become emotionally involved in whether he lives or dies. It is also incredibly frustrating. We as an audience know what Paul's situation is but the people he calls do not. They usually come to the situation with skepticism about what is really happening. So it is frustrating as an audience when people just don't really believe what is happening to him. I'm going to spoil the story here so please don't read any more if you want to be surprised. Bearing in mind I've not been buried alive and do not know what happens but I got the impression that Paul could have tried a bit harder to get out. He has a knife and if I was there I would try to cut through the wood to break it. At one stage towards the end the wood in the lid does break and the dirt starts filling the box. We are also told that Paul is not buried that far down. He can actually hear things above ground so obviously once he gets through the wood it would not be that hard to dig his way out. The dirt would not be too hard to dig through either as he was only recently buried.

Ryan Reynolds is a very brave actor to take on this role. Not only is he confined to a small space but he has to keep our interest for the entire length of the film. He does a very good job and does hold us captivated.

This is one of those situations that a lot of people fear the most. Not really a film for those people who get claustrophobic but otherwise a good thriller.

Joan Rivers: A Piece Of Work

We take a year in the life of one of the biggest comedians. She is a very outspoken woman and we spend time in her 75th year on earth.

I have known of Joan Rivers for quite a while. I cannot quite remember where and when I first saw her but I mostly remember her from my favourite Mel Brooks film 'Spaceballs'. The wonderful thing about this film is that you learn more about her. We see some of her early stand-up performances most notably from 'The Tonight Show'. I think she is a very funny woman and it was great to see these old clips. What is interesting about the film is that Joan said she mostly wanted to be an actress but it did not look like she got her dream. She is still doing stand-up gigs and we get to see some of the more obscure places she has to perform in. But she does also say that she will do anything. I'm assuming that is the case but at the right price. Joan has been to Australia a few times and most memorably was her last visit when she made a very honest appearance on the Logie awards to great acclaim. The one thing that you can't really get past with Joan is the plastic surgery. At one point she is given a Comedy Central Roast and quite rightly predicts that most of the jokes will be about her looks. Personally I think she looks a bit strange with her really tight skin. But she is incredibly funny so I can look past that, so to speak. The only problem I had with the film was her relationship with her friend Bill Sammeth. He is known to disappear a lot which upsets Joan quite a bit. However, we don't know where he goes or what he does which was disappointing.

A fascinating look at one of the funniest woman working today. Most will only know her from the appearances on the red carpet of various events and her surgeries but you get to know her better from this film.

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Much like most film studios, Disney are continuing to go through their archives to look for ideas that they can use for movies. This time they go to a segment from their beloved animated classic 'Fantasia'.

One of my earliest cinematic memories, and possibly my first, was my parents taking me to see 'Fantasia' at the movies. I think I may have been too young to fully appreciate it but I know that I did enjoy the segment with Mickey Mouse as a sorcerer's apprentice. While I do not agree that studios should be using such weak ideas to make films, it is one of those facts of life that you just have to live with. There are probably many kids who don't even know what 'Fantasia' is so there is nothing for them to know what the film is referencing. Which I think is a good thing. This film could work if it did not have to live up to such high expectations. Right from the start the film put me off. The opening montage which explains Balthazar's history came across as very rushed. There was obviously a lot of information to impart and they try to do it in such a short space of time that it gets confusing. It looks like the test audiences did not like the opening. I think the writers have made the story unnecessarily complex. I understand they try to make it interesting and have enough plot for all the characters but it just gets a bit overwhelming. Considering the rest of the story there was no need to be so complex. The film does not get much better than that. The only good thing are the action sequences. Director Jon Turteltaub certainly knows how to make good action scenes and they are a lot of fun.

You would think that because he came up with the idea for the film and help produce it that Nicolas Cage would be really into the film. But he just comes across as very bored with it. Possibly his character has been searching for an apprentice for so long that he is just incredibly tired. I don't know what it is but I'm not much of a fan of Jay Baruchel. While he is playing a very nerdy character in this film, I don't think that suited the part of being a sorcerer's apprentice. He is expect to become a great sorcerer but the nerdiness will always be there and diminish his impact. While it is a bit disappointing that Alfred Molina is once again playing the villain, he is always really good.

If you completely forget where the idea came from then you may get a bit of fun out of this film. But it is still pretty bland and unnecessarily complex.

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

Director Oliver Stone wanted to do a film about the recent financial crisis. So rather than making a new film he has decided to do a sequel to his previous work.

He says it is not a sequel but it is. I think Oliver is getting soft in his old age. He used to make hard hitting films about real events but his recent films have been anything but. This film is the perfect example. I think it would work fine if it was not related to the first film. It does not tell you anything you did not already know about Wall Street and how ruthless the people who work there can be. I will admit that most of the financial language I did not understand but I was able to get the gist to know what was going on. As further proof of Oliver's softness is the story he has given his famous villain Gordon Gekko. Gordon has a daughter involved in the story so it makes him softer and more relate able. I suppose that can be a good thing where you learn to not see him as a ruthless money grubber. But it also means the villain role is passed to someone else. But he can still be bad.

I've always been a fan of Michael Douglas and look forward to seeing him in anything. Gordon Gekko is probably one of his most memorable characters and so he does a very good job here. Shia LaBeouf is not an actor that impresses me. He has not really done anything I'd rate as being great. When he's not living in the shadow of famous older characters he is being chased by robots. Everyone is raving about Carey Mulligan but I'm not that impressed yet. I see potential and hope she does more challenging roles in the future. Josh Brolin makes a nice villain though.

An enjoyable drama but not as great as the first film. We do not learn anything about finance that we did not already know. But we do learn more about an old favourite.