Rank the Films #5: Fast and Furious

As any regular reader of feeling fuzzier will know, lists are pretty darn nifty. We have a profound appreciation for straight-up lists. This is the thinking behind Rank the Films, a regular feature that pulls apart the pros and cons of a series of films, ranking them in order of bad to good. 

With Fast and Furious 6 hitting screens across Australia on June 6th, in this instalment of Rank the Films we decided to take a look at the rest of the franchise (from The Fast and the Furious [2001] to Fast Five [2011] and rank them in order from worst to best. 

5th - 2 Fast 2 Furious (2003)

Rotten Tomatoes: 36%

The first sequel of many, 2 Fast 2 Furious is the least entertaining and the most needlessly flashy of this franchise. Essentially a whole lot of substance and very little underneath the pretty cars and prettier women, 2 Fast 2 Furious is a fairly forgettable experience that doesn't really tax the braincells or stretch the imagination. 

With Dominic Toretto opting to sit this entry out, the focus here is on Paul Walker's undercover cop Brian O'Connor who is looking to get in deep with a gang of underground street-racers. Essentially, 2 Fast 2 Furious is a bit like Speed 2: Cruise Control. Without its lead actor, most of the magic is gone. The action certainly is fast and furious but it is also flashy, noisy and messy. 

And let's be honest here, whoever came up with that god-awful title should be shot. In the foot, just so it hurts more. 

4th - The Fast and The Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006)

Rotten Tomatoes: 35%

A pseudo-spin-off, Tokyo Drift is a new direction for the franchise after the disappointing 2 Fast 2 Furious. Or, at least that was the idea. Tokyo Drift has an entirely new cast (Lucas Black as 17 year-old scamp Sean Boswell is the lead), a new setting (Tokyo, duh) and a new director (Justin Lin). 

The makeover is fairly superficial however as the premise is more or less the same; attractive young people drive attractive and expensive cars ridiculously fast. BUT THIS TIME IN JAPAN. Revolutionary, I know.

The format here is too similar to ever feel completely fresh or exciting. The acting is terrible and the script is as flat as ever. The only main plus point is the neon-lit visuals and colours. Also, the chronology is all over the shop; even though is was made in 2006 and Fast 6 comes out in 2013, Tokyo Drift is apparently the last chronologically. So what, is this film set in the future? Also, Vin Diesel has a cameo at the end, meaning we all know he lives through Fast 6 and next years Fast 7. Great (either that or he's a cyborg because it's the future, duh)

At the end of the day, Tokyo Drift drifts into obscurity alongside other unnecessary spin-offs like The Scorpion King and X-Men Origins: Wolverine. 

3rd - Fast and Furious (2009)

Rotten Tomatoes: 27%

Returning the central characters after Tokyo Drift, 2009's Fast and Furious (also in the running for most stupid film title of the franchise) has some plus points to its name. 

First of all, it's the first since The Fast and the Furious (2001) to have Vin Diesel as the lead and it also has sees Paul Walker return as O'Conner. Michelle Rodriguez is also back as Letty Ortiz and Jordana Brewster returns as Mia Toretto. Put all this together and you get an entry that is fairly solid, if unspectacular. 

For those unfamiliar with the franchise, the plot may be a little convoluted but at least it tries to something a little different after the first cookie-cutter entries. It is however the first real sequel to the original, which is something I liked about it.

2nd - The Fast and The Furious (2001)

Rotten Tomatoes: 52%

The original - the best? Not quite. The Fast and the Furious was released back in 2001 and launched the careers of both Vin Diesel and Paul Walker. Respectively, the play ex-con Dom Toretto and undercover LAPD cop Brian O'Conner.

The Fast and the Furious is something of a guilty pleasure that, like most of the others in the series doesn't require much emotional investment or thought.

Unlike it's less than great sequel however, this first film is relatively fresh and doesn't pretend to be anything that it isn't (which is essentially a B-grade cop flick with some slick looking cars). Also, it doesn't feel as though it has aged as rapidly as its newer stable-mates.

1st - Fast Five (2011)

Rotten Tomatoes: 78%

How many fifth films in a franchise can claim to be the pick of the bunch? If you answered none, then Fast Five is here to prove you wrong.

A new setting (Rio de Janeiro), a new vibe (more of a crime/heist movie than a Fast and Furious movie) and an injection of new talent (adding Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson to proceedings really spiced things up) all made Fast Five a cut above the rest in this franchise.

Like I said, the central plot of this fifth entry is that of a $100 million heist rather than street cars or racing, making it a lot more approachable for a wider audience. Pitting the Rock and Vin Diesel up against one another in a cataclysmic fist fight was quite possibly one of the most testosterone fuelled things committed to cinema (okay, that might be a slight exaggeration).

The ending will also feed into the plot of the next film, Fast and Furious 6, which is due out here in Australia on the 6th of June. Excited? Apprehensive? Over it? Let me know in the comments section below!


Rank the Films will be back in June with a bumper edition: Pixar. Click on these links to read previous editions: #4: Marvel, #3: Die Hard, #2: Star Wars, #1: Harry Potter. 

Read More

Voice of Reason #12: When Sequel Titles Go Wrong!

Whilst writing my most recent Rank the Films feature it occurred to me that the Fast and Furious franchise (on which the feature is centred) is a completely random hodge-podge of numbers, colons and puns. Put simply, the F&F franchise is a complete mess when it comes to sequel naming, potenially the worst out there.

Or is it? Brace yourselves people, because what follows is a fairly long rant/blog post that explores the messy consequences of when sequel titles go bad. This could get ugly...

Fast and Furious series

Fast and Furious

The Fast and the Furious (2001)

2 Fast 2 Furious (2003)

The Fast and the Furious:  Tokyo Drift (2006)

Fast and Furious (2009)

Fast Five/Fast and Furious 5: Rio Heist (2011)
Fast and Furious 6 (2013)

Okay, so let's start out with the main offender. Here, we can see a franchise committing numerous offences. Not only does the second film make use of a poor two/too pun, but the fourth is too easily confused with the first; taking out the 'the' is pretty lazy.

Meanwhile, the fifth film has multiple titles that vary from country to country and the sixth film is actually the fifth chronologically so why is it called the sixth? Messy, stupid and lazy. 

I Know What You Did Last Summer 'series'

I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)
I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)
I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer (2006)

As any frequent reader of this blog will know, I don't watch horror films. However, if there's one thing I know about horror films, it is that they have really silly and cringe-inducing sequel titles. Case in point: the I Know What You Did Last Summer series.

The first title is fairly creepy and chilling. It poses questions of 'what?' and 'why?' and gets the curiosity juices flowing in the audience. Then come the sequels. I Still Know What You Did Last Summer? Really? That creative meeting must have taken 60 seconds, tops. No surprise then, that the threequel is a cheap, Z-grade, straight-to-DVD shocker.

Also, are all these films set within one year? Otherwise 'last summer' was more than a year ago. Then again, I suppose "I Know What You Did Five Summers Ago" doesn't really roll off the tongue does it?

Die Hard series

2013's A Good Day to Die Hard

Die Hard (1988)
Die Hard 2: Die Harder (1990)
Die Hard With A Vengeance (1995)
Live Free or Die Hard/Die Hard 4.0 (2007)
A Good Day To Die Hard (2013)
Die Hardest (????)

I'm a big Die Hard fan (well, the first four anyway). But even I can admit that the film titles are all over the shop. Die Harder is a great tougue-in-cheek title, but after that it gets messy. The 3rd film commints the cardinal sin of dropping the number 3 whilst having two titles for the fourth film (one for America, one for the rest of the world) is just plain silly. Just pick one, it isn't that hard.

By the time we get the fifth (A Good Day to Die Hard) and the sixth (Die Hardest) films, all pretence of order and structure has jumped out of the window and been replaced with poor puns and play-on words.

X-Men series

X-Men (2000)

X2: X-Men United (2003)

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

X-Men: Origins: Wolverine (2009)
X-Men: First Class (2011)

The Wolverine (2013)

Much like Die Hard, the X-Men franchise has no idea whether it is coming or going title wise. A whole hodge podge of numbers, subtitles and colons, the X-Men films lack coherent and logical titles. Also, what's up with X-Men: Origins: Wolverine? Is that two sets of colons? Madness! MADNESS!

Step Up series

Step Up (2006)
Step Up 2: The Streets (2008)
Step Up 3D (2010)
Step Up Revolution (2012)

The first two aren't that bad if you ignore the heinous pun in the second film. But trading in the title of the third film for a '3D'? Shameful.

Planet of the Apes series

James Franco in Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Planet of the Apes (1968)
Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)
Escape from Planet of the Apes (1971)
Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972)
Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973)
Planet of the Apes (2001)
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)

Overly wordy and complicated, anyone other than a die-hard fan of this series would be able to piece together the correct order of these films. There's wayyy too many 'of's and 'the's with this series.

Resident Evil series

Resident Evil (2002)
Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004)
Resident Evil: Extinction (2007)
Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010)
Resident Evil: Retribution (2012)

Dull, dull, dull, dull. Would an outsider (such as myself) who has never seen any of these films be able to put them in order (without using Wikipedia)? Of course not. That's how you know your titles are crap.


Kickpuncher series

Kickpuncher
Kickpuncher 2: Codename Punchkicker
Kickpuncher III: The Final Kickening
Kickpuncher: Detroit
Kicksplasher

Does this one really need any explanation? I think it pretty much speaks for itself. Dreadful, but somehow brilliant (if your names are Troy or Abed).

So how should it really be done?

Okay, so enough criticism, it's time to get constructive. We've seen the deadly sins of movie sequel titling. The real question is; how should it really be done? Well, more often than not, simplicity is the key...

Back to the Future series

Back to the Future (1985)

Back to the Future Part II (1989)

Back to the Future Part III (1990)

Clever right? Easy, simple and straight-forward. Why complicate matters with messy subtitles, colons and puns?

Iron Man series

Iron Man (2008)
Iron Man 2 (2010)
Iron Man 3 (2013)

Again, simple and easy to understand. 1, 2, 3, 4; makes sense right? Lethal Weapon, Men in Black, Mission: Impossible (kind of) have all numbered their franchises this way and there is really no reason to get confused or lost here. 

Thank god Marvel didn't add pointless or redundant subtitles to each sequel. Iron Man: Rise of Extremis sounds a little naff don't you reckon?

Harry Potter series

Harry Potter and the Philosphers' Stone (2001)
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (2010)
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 (2011)

Follow this formula and it'll be pretty hard to mess up titling your film sequel: Series Protagonist's Name + Hugely Important Narrative Device = Easy. Now, how hard was that?

Phew, I'm glad that's off my chest. Sometimes you just need to vent these things. Apologies for the length of the post but there are a huge amount of examples to choose from!

Let me know your thoughts in the comments section below! Check back this week for my next entry into Rank the Films. This month, The Fast and the Furious franchise. 

Read More

My Top 20 Songs of the Last 20 Years

In order to celebrate 20 years of the Hottest 100, Australian radio station triple j is currently running a feature on the Hottest 100 Songs of the Last 20 Years. In essence, anyone around the world is given the opportunity to vote for their favourite 20 songs since January 1st 1993 (they can be anything and everything, from the Lion King soundtrack to Eminem) and then from there, a list of the Top 100 is compiled.

"So what!" I hear you cry? Well so this, that's what. I figured that I wanted to get people's thoughts on their personal favourite songs and how they would vote in the poll. I was curious to see what my readers thought and so, here is your chance to get thinking and let me know in the comments section below!

 In order to get everyone started, here's the top 20 songs that I personally picked (and voted for)...

I've included a link to the Spotify playlist for those you who like listening to music and stuff. To listen to the playlist, click on this link here: My Top 20 Songs of the Last 20 Years.

Tracklisting

1. Seven Nation Army - The White Stripes
2. The Hardest Button to Button - The White Stripes 
3. Last Nite - The Strokes
4. Fluorescent Adolescent - Arctic Monkeys
5. If You Wanna - The Vaccines
6. Banquet - Bloc Party
7. Take Me Out - Franz Ferdinand
8. Feel Good Inc. - Gorillaz
9. Fire - Kasabian
10. Shuffle - Bombay Bicycle Club
11. Spanish Sahara - Foals
12. Islands - The xx
13. Little Lion Man - Mumford and Sons
14. Common People - Pulp
15. Live Forever - Oasis
16. Electric Feel - MGMT
17. Mr. Brightside - The Killers
18. Lonely Boy - The Black Keys
19. Since I Left You - The Avalanches
20. The Rockefeller Skank - Fatboy Slim

Note: Some tracks like 'Lonely Boy' - The Black Keys aren't included in the Spotify library so I've included 'Tighten Up' from their Brothers LP instead. 

Be sure to let me know what you think of my playlist and let me know which songs you would choose!

Click here to listen to my Ultimate Spotify Playlist of 2012. 

Read More

Thumbs and Ammo

"I will find you and I will give you a thumbs up"

Every now and again the Internet throws up something that is so brilliant it just has to be shared. Last month, I linked a whole host of images of superheroes emblazoned with product placement (my post is here whilst the original Benhance.net account is here.


This month however, a feature on Empire.com pointed me in the direction of a great blog that I also wanted to pass on; Thumbs and Ammo. 

Many casual movie-goers often complain that films can be too violent and that they glamorize guns. Well, Thumbs and Ammo go some way to setting the record straight with this ingenious idea; take a film still and Photoshop a great big thumbs up in place of the gun. I've included some of my favourites from the blog below...

*Unless it wasn't clear, I don't profess to owning any of these images. They have all been conceived of and
produced by various users and originate from the Thumbs and Ammo Blogspot. All kudos and credit should go to them, I'm just passing it on!

If you have a favourite then let me know in the comments section below!

Batman gives his seal of approval

"Ever jumped through the air whilst firing two guns?"

"I'll be back - with a thumbs up"

See, even Wookies have thumbs

Ripley gets in on the action

Bond trades his trademark Walther PPK for a thumbs up

Ethan Hunt is A-OK

Pulp Fiction - the pacifist edition

Bruce Willis shows off his positive can-do attitude in Looper...

And a second time in Die Hard 3: With A Vengence

Tom Hardy aims down the sights of his thumb

Somebody stop me! 

The Joker has caused some real havoc with that thumb of his

Read More

Verdict: Doctor Who Series 7 Part 2

Clara and The Doctor in action

Matt Smith and newbie Jenna-Louise Coleman swung into action aboard the TARDIS as The Doctor and Clara Oswald in the eight episodes concluding Series 7. With the series split into two unequal halves, this is my write-up on each episode from Part 2 of Series 7. 

Check out my write-up of Part 1 here: Verdict: Doctor Who Series 7 Part 1.
Also, for a preview of Series 7 Part 2, click here: TV Preview #3: Doctor Who Series 7 Part 2

The Bells of St John - 8/10

The Fez is back

If Doctor Who met Eagle Eye and iRobot, the end result would be something along the lines of The Bells of St. John; a Doctor Who spin on a modern-day issue such as surveillance and control which was well-thought out and written. Penned by show front-runner Steven Moffat, the eighth episode from Series 7 introduced Clara Oswald (for the third time) and this time for good. 

Quirky, cheeky and likeable, Clara is a nice character who probably isn't as divisive as Donna or Amy were. On the whole, a solid character introduction that set the tone nicely; her and Doctor look to be a nice team that don't lack wit.The continuity from The Snowmen is exciting stuff, the inclination being that the Greater Intelligence is a running baddie from here on in.

The Rings of Akhaten - 4/10

Don't look back into the sun

Huge in scale, The Rings of Akhaten reminded me a lot of Asylum of the Daleks from earlier in the series; the producers of the show really went to town on creating the alien planet that the Doctor and Clara visit for their first real adventure. 

Whilst the look and feel was decidedly George Lucasey, the plot here felt oddly paced. A touching prologue that charts Clara's parents meeting and her mother's untimely death was followed by the duo's arrival on one of the most authentic looking alien worlds we have seen in the show.

After a brief jaunt through a bustling market, the plot loses any sense of coherence. Some genuinely terrifying villains called the Mummy and the Vigils feel grossly underused. Also, whatever happened to aliens haveing alien names? After such build-up, the whole episode just felt like a bit of a cop-out. The story was sloppy, there was little sense of tension or suspense. Defiantly a low-point for this series and one of the poorest Who episodes I can remember.

The episode did manage to however to further integrate Clara into the Whoniverse; she already feels as much a part of the show as Rose or Amy did which is a plus - the leaf and her book were a nice touch.

Cold War - 8/10

"Stay here and don't argue"
"I'm not"

Cold War saw the Doctor and Clara get caught up in well, the Cold War; stuck on a Soviet nuclear submarine in the Arctic circle, the time-travelling duo run into an old foe; the Ice Warriors.

I thought that Cold War was a great episode that did a great job of reintroducing an old enemy to a new generation. As their first appearance in New Who, the Ice Warriors were made to seem really scary and formidable, and not a pantomime villain.

The terror scale started to ramp up when the lone Warrior (named Grand Marshall Skaldak) slipped out of his armour and went all xenomorph on our asses; the claustrophobic setting only made the episode a real nail-biter. After the damp squib that was The Ring of Akhaten, Cold War achieved pretty much everything you could have asked of it. Fingers crossed the Ice Warriors aren't a one off.

Hide - 7/10

She's behind you!

Hide was another fantastic episode in the seventh season of Doctor Who. The setting (1970's Britain, a haunted manor house) was brilliantly inter-spliced with some futuristic elements and a 'pocket universe' colliding with our own. It was a fantastically novel way of exploring the haunted house premise whilst keeping to the look and feel distinctly Doctor Who. 

Again, this episode did a great job of developing to the relationship between The Doctor and Clara. The two have a great on screen rapport and her fiery and feisty nature really genres energy between the characters. Clara is fast becoming one of my favourite companions to the Doctor. Here's hoping that she sticks around after this season.

The episode's only downsides for me were the supporting characters (Jessica Raine and Dougray Scott as Emma Grayling and Alec Palmer respectively) a little flat and uninteresting. Also, the creature that was stalking Hila Tukurian (Kemi-Bo Jacobs) in the pocket universe was just plain ugly and could have been something the audience can sympathise with more rather than despise. 

Journey To The Centre of The TARDIS - 8/10

The Doctor gazes into the Eye of Harmony.

Yes, finally, an extended and decent look at the inner-workings of the TARDIS. I really liked this episode, probably up there with others from this series like Asylum of the Daleks and The Angels Take Manhattan. 

However, much like both of these episodes, Journey would have been a much better story had it not been crammed into one 45 minute episode. The creepy projections that stalked Clara were genuinely terrifying but imagine if those scenes had been allowed to drag on. Just imagine how brilliantly scary they would have been if those scenes had been allowed to slow right down and take a breath.

It's not like the scope of the episode would have felt stretched  The TARDIS is vast and had so much potential to be drawn out much like the brilliant Silence in the Library episodes. As it is, Journey is a great premise done well given the short run-time. It did a fantastic job of developing the Doctor and Clara's relationship (that scene where the Doctor confronted a confused Clara about her secret was exhilarating)  and hinting at a cracking finale before that great twist ending.

The Crimson Horror - 6/10

The Doctor takes a closer look at The Crimson Horror

Back in Victorian England, The Doctor and Clara team up with Madame Vastra, Jenny and Strax to solve the mystery of the Crimson 'orror that plagues a Yorkshire town. 

Whilst I can see why The Crimson Horror will be popular with some people, I personally didn't like it that much. Maybe I'm biased (Victorian England is wayyy over done) but I just felt that this episode really lacked that spark the previous three had. Diana Rigg was great as Mrs. Gillyflower, the scenery-gnawing baddie, whilst the reveal of Mr. Sweet was genuinely surprising. Rigg's character was very over-the-top, making her a good pantomime villain. 

Another plus side was some great giggle-worthy jokes (Attack of the Supermodels!) and the great direction by Saul Meltzein. On the downside however, I felt that the plot was too rushed or ill-explained at some key points in the narrative. Likewise, the Doctor and Clara weren't featured all that much for an episdoe so close to the finale.

Nightmare in Silver - 8/10

"Knight to E6"

The second episode to have been written by Neil Gaiman after 2011's The Doctor's Wife, Nightmare in Silver was certainly set an ambitious task; to make the Cybermen scary again.

Did it work? Yes, the Cybermen were the best they've been since 2006 in my opinion. Faster, cleverer and adaptable, the Doctor's second most fearsome enemy were definitely not as cuddly this time around.

A great aspect of this episode was Matt Smith's schizophrenic personality; it really showed off his acting prowess. Also, Warwick Davis gave an understated (and great) performance as Porridge. Elsewhere however, the addition of  Artie and Angie to the time-travelling cast fell a little flat and I felt they didn't add much. Other than that, Nightmare in Silver was a great episode that felt delightfully retro-Who.

The Name of the Doctor - 10/10

The Doctor visits Trenzalore

Easily the best finale we've had in years, The Name of the Doctor was a fantastic premise that had you gripped from the very start.

In recent years, Doctor Who finales have tended to be grand in scale but disappointing in delivery; think Last of the Time Lords and Journey's End. This time around however, the stakes were still high (the Doctor was faced with years of helping and saving people being re-written) but the story was personal and touching. 

First of all, Matt Smith's acting was fantastic; the longer he goes on, the better he gets. His tender moments with Clara and River show Smith is adding some really deep emotion to his incarnation of the Timelord. Meanwhile, Alex Kingston was also great as the returning River Song. Whether this turns out to be her final appearance we don't know, but if it was, it would be a rather fitting send-off. Jenna Louise Coleman as Clara was, as always it seems, brilliant and Richard Grant was again menacing as the Great Intelligence. The Whispermen were also genuinely terrifying, although a little redundant at the end of the day. 

With both the riddle surrounding Clara brilliantly exposed (kudos for including her in the narrative of the original series) and the Doctor's name nudged aside (did y'all really think we'd find it out?), the ending to this episode brilliantly sets up the 50th Anniversary Special in November - the trifecta of Smith, Tennant and now John Hurt promises to be a real treat. Bring it on.

Final Thoughts - 7.5/10

On the whole, this run of eight episodes has been something of a roller coaster ride. Reaching great heights (Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS, The Name of the Doctor) and plumbing some disappointing lows (The Rings of Akhaten), the quality has been varied at times to say the least. An average score of 7.5 is fairly accurate; the brilliant introduction of Clara Oswald, the ongoing conundrum of the Doctor's name and the reinvention of the Ice Warriors and the Cybermen was offset by some slightly disappointing villains and premises. Also, the lack of double-parters meant some of the stories felt rushed. 

The sheer excitement and buzz generated by that finale (what a cliffhanger! Moffat really is a good one for effective rug-pulls) will no doubt whip fans into a frenzy in the months in between now and the 50th Anniversary Special. Let's just hope it can deliver; let the crazy predictions and speculating begin!

Read More

Film Review: Star Trek Into Darkness

Spock always hated the way Kirk stared at his pointy ears

This review does contain some mild spoilers. Beware.

Prepare to journey into the final frontier once again with J.J Abrams' second entry into the new Star Trek canon. Kirk, Spock, Uhura and co. are back in action and this time their facing off against menacing villain John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch). This is Star Trek Into Darkness and it's life, but not as we know it.

Now, let me be heard that I am not a Trekkie. I've never seen any of the original film series (other than 1996's pretty good First Contact and 2002's forgettable Nemesis). I've always been a Star Wars fan but I've never gotten into Star Trek. This however changed when the series was given a kick up the backside in the form of 2009's reboot, Star Trek.

The Enterprise looks a little worse for wear.

Helmed by Spielberg-wannabe J.J Abrams (of Mission Impossible III and Lost fame), the series was given a  complete new lease of life with a young spunky cast and a healthy dose of action and adventure.

With Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto cast in the lead roles of Kirk and Spock respectively, Star Trek was a surprise hit with fans of the show and complete newbies alike.

Fast forward to 2013 and here we have the sequel, Into Darkness warping into cinemas. So what's the verdict? Well I'm glad you asked, because oh boy is it good.

After opening with a fun jaunt through a colourful rainforest populated with extras from Apocolypto, Kirk is faced with breaking the 'Prime Directive' to save the life of his first officer, Spock. They return to Earth where Kirk is removed as Captain and the duo are separated to different ships.

This however doesn't last as before long, Benedict Cumberbatch is on hand to catch Moriarty, sorry, I mean start 'a one-man war' by bombing Starfleet. One of the most notable things from Into Darkness is the breakneck speed at which the plot zooms by. It doesn't sit still, with twists and turns hitting you thick and fast from the off. This is a good thing at first but after an hour and thirty, it felt as though the film could have done with a brief pause to draw breath. It really does race by, the 133 minutes feeling like half the time.

Elementary, my dear Watson: Benedict Cumberbatch
as ex-Starfleet officer John Harrison.

Into Darkness certainly has it's own fair share of rug-pulls and double bluffs that'll have you teetering on the edge of your seat. It's really fun, popcorn-munching summer blockbuster stuff that should give Star Wars fans the world over a new-found sense of hope.

Minor plot pacing niggles aside, Into Darkness really is a brilliant science-fiction caper. First off, Chris Pine is great as the impetuous and headstrong Captain Kirk; Pine has the whole 'arrogant ladies man' act down pat in the first half of the film before his heroic heart kicks in near the end.

Likewise, Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldana were great as Spock and Uhura. They didn't grow that much as a couple this time around, the focus very much on Cumberbatch's villain (more on that later) as well as Kirk and Spock's blossoming bromance.

Simon Pegg naturally brings the biggest laughs as Scottie but so does Karl Urban's delightfully cynical wise-cracking science officer Bones. Put together, these two add a much needed sense of levity to Into Darkness which is otherwise a fairly dark film (funny that).

Alice Eve plays a surprisingly bigger part than I had her pegged for; her role as deputy science officer Carol Marcus was more well-rounded than simply being the eye-candy for Kirk to oggle at. I mean, he still does oggle her but she's there for more than that. Kind of.

The biggest standout performance was without a doubt Benedict Cumberbatch as disgruntled ex-Starfleet officer John Harrison. I'm treading carefully around his character given the spoilers involved but, put simply, he was fantastic. His performance is truly memorable one that will see him added to the pantheon of great British baddies alongside Alan Rickman as Hans Gruber and Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin.

"What? I misplaced my regulation Starfleet uniform"

The film also manages to keep the reins on it's own ambition. Whilst most sequels aim bigger and bolder, Into Darkness keeps thing relatively close and personal. Sure, the final third sees some serious destruction in down-town San Francisco but for the duration, the action is confined the dark corridors and even darker ruins on the Klingon home-world, Kronos. Yep, you read that right, the Klingons are back. Well, kind of.

There are also plenty of nods, winks and nudges for fans of the original series to enjoy. A cameo reprisal for Leonard Nimoy was pleasing as it showed that Abrams didn't ignore the alternate timeline premise the first film set-up.

As for the direction, it's two thumbs up for J.J Abrams. The film is gorgeously shot and the aesthetics are a far cry from the camp 1960's show. Again, the Klingon home-world is a particularly gloomy and murky visual treat. A dizzying action set piece where the Enterprise is inverted up-ways, side-ways and every-ways in between was particularly impressive.

So is Into Darkness an improvement on its predecessor? Yes, and then some. And if every blockbuster this year is as fun, exciting and genuinely good as Into Darkness, then we're in for one stonking good summer; first Iron Man 3 and now this. 2013 is really shaping up well if you ask me.

I give Star Trek Into Darkness: 9/10

Read More

Verdict: The Walking Dead Season 1

Soon to be into its fourth season, AMC's The Walking Dead is forever described as one of the best television shows currently being made in the States. Because of this, I got on-board with season one of The Walking Dead to see what all the fuss was about. 

Originally hitting television screens back in 2010, The Walking Dead follows a group of survivors, lead by police officer Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln) who are have lived through a zombie epidemic that has left the world devastated. Now, living together in a camp outside of Atlanta, the group of need to survive one another as well as the strings of 'walkers' that stalk them.

Joining Andrew Lincoln's Rick Grimes in the main cast are Jon Bernthal, who plays Rick's best friend and former colleague Shane Walsh, Sarah Wayne Callies, who plays Lori, Rick's wife and Chandler Riggs, who plays Rick and Lori's son Carl.

The first thing to note about the show is the high production quality. It looks and feels like a film and not some cheap B-movie either. The only difference here is the longer run-time. Rather than a two hour film that zooms around and skips any characterisation in favour of blood, guts and shotguns.

The Walking Dead is less a show about zombies and more a show about survival, comradeship and hope with zombies added on. The focus here is very much on the human characters and how they learn to live with one another post-apocalypse.

Sure, there are some fantastic set-pieces that see Rick and the group battle against swarms of walkers (such as the the conclusion to the second episode 'Guts', pictured right), but the main draw here is the quieter, slower scenes that show off the cast's fantastic acting abilities.

I'll be honest here; there are some really emotional moments in the first season that tug at the heart strings. Without giving too much away, there are a couple of times in the brilliant first episode and then later on at the start of the third that had me on the verge of tears. By the time the season wraps up, you'll be blubbing your eyes out.

In terms of action, there are some really full-on and kick-ass action sequences in the show. A midnight raid at the group's camp in the fourth episode is really shocking and doesn't hold anything back. The character's mortality is never in doubt, which is a really big plus point.

The acting and characterisation really is top-notch in The Walking Dead. Each character feels fully fleshed out after a mere five minutes of screen time. A great example is Morgan from the first episode. In the one episode, he is given a fantastic amount of depth; struggling to keep himself and his son Duane alive, he also has to cope with coming to terms with his wife being taken by the hordes of zombies. He isn't just some character who comes into the show, moves the plot along and is quickly written out.

Laurie Holden was a stand-out performer as Andrea. Episode 4 in particular is a really gut-wrenching performance. Likewise, I also found that characters such as Shane (Jon Bernthal) were brilliantly three-dimensional and interesting.

If your a fan of apocalyptic/zombie show then The Walking Dead will have most definitely not escaped your notice. If you are like me and you are looking for a really interesting and deep drama that looks and feels like a movie, you should get on board. You don't have to be a Romero fan to enjoy the Walking Dead. I'm certainly not a zombie film fan, but I'm really glad I gave this brilliant show a chance.

Read More

Verdict: Russell Howard's Good News Series 8

Back on the air in Britain for its eighth series, BBC 3 satirical news show Russell Howard's Good News, is an undiscovered gem for many of us here in Australia. Brilliantly witty, silly and at times heart-warming, any fan of shows like Mock the Week, Good News Week and E!'s The Soup.
Premièring on BBC 3 back in 2009, it's hard to believe that Mr. Howard is already up to his eighth series of Good News. With the content as witty and fresh as ever, Good News is one of those shows that never fails to bring a smile to my face.

Mr. Howard in full flow

Ranging from the stupid, the serious and the downright weird, the topical stories that the show covers are eclectic to say the least. The first episode of this new series saw Russell inject his cheeky charm onto some serious news stories like the threat of war with North Korea, the recent death of Baroness Thatcher and Liverpool football player Luis Suarez being banned for biting before veering into the wonderfully kooky and crazy side of current affairs.

A man in a relationship with his car? Check. A primary school that banned triangular flapjacks? Check-a-rooney. The comedy is found in not just the ridiculous stories, but the ridiculous ways in which they are reported. Howard has now developed into a confident and collected presenter too, always dealing with the shifts in tone well.

It is however, the final segment of every show, "It's not all doom and gloom", that sets this show apart from others on the box that have a similar pitch. At the end of every show, Howard shows off a heart-warming and genuinely touching story that has made the news. It leaves the audience with a smile on their face and a tear in their eye; what a brilliant way to end a show that is, at the end of the day, all about the 'Good News'.

So if your on the prowl for a bit of a giggle at the lighter side of the news, give Good News a whirl either on YouTube (the 8th Series is uploaded direct from the UK) or on the Foxtel and the ABC.

Read More

The 10 Highest Grossing Films of 2013

Just some of the cinematic
heavy-weights hitting the silver screen
this year

As you may or may not have heard, a certain Marvel film hit cinema screens across the world in the last few weeks, kick-starting the 2013 blockbuster season. In just its first weekend, Iron Man 3 made nearly $200 million, effectively making back its entire budget in the space of just a few days. All this talk of money got me thinking; is Iron Man 3 set to make more than the gigantic $1.5 billion that The Avengers took this time last year?

So, with so many big releases set to hit the big screen across the next few months and beyond, I saw this as a great opportunity to hazard a guess at which 10 films would be making the most money in 2013.

Looking back at last year, the film that raked in the most moolah was The Avengers, making just over $1.5 billion dollars, making it the third highest grossing film of all time. Behind that, was Skyfall, The Dark Knight Rises and The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, all with just over $1 billion apiece.

In fifth place was Ice Age: Continental Drift ($877m) followed by the final instalment of The Twilight Saga ($829m) and The Amazing Spider-man ($752m). Rounding out the top ten was Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted ($742m), The Hunger Games ($691m) and Men in Black 3 ($624m). 

For 2013, there is no shortage of heavy-weights that are ready to do battle on the silver screen. With superheroes, cowboys, dwarves and monsters alike all lining up to take your money, which movie this year is going to be the biggest? 

Mike and Sully are back in
Monsters University

Well, this week, Star Trek Into Darkness opens across the world followed by The Hangover III and Fast and Furious 6 in the weeks afterwards. The 2009 reboot of Star Trek didn't make shed loads of cash so it remains to be seen whether this one will fare that much better; it is at number 10 on my prediction list. Meanwhile, The Hangover Part II racked up over $500 million so I see no reason why this new one won't go even further. 

In June we have Monsters University, Man of Steel and World War Z, whilst July sees the release of The Lone Ranger, Pacific Rim and The Wolverine. Monsters Inc. is one of the most beloved Pixar films so I'm hoping the prequel, Monsters University challenges Toy Story 3 for the highest grossing Pixar film. I placed it at number 4, just outside the $1 billion mark.

Looking further down the track we also have Thor: The Dark World and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire to look forward to and the second instalment of The Hobbit, The Desolation of Smaug around Christmas. Catching Fire is starting to get some really big excitement growing behind it so I'm thinking it'll more than outdo the $691 million made by the first film.

So what will the Top 10 Grossing films of 2013 look like once the numbers are in? Well, here's my predictions;

1. Iron Man 3 - $1.3+ billion 
2. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug - 1.2+ billion
3. Man of Steel - $1 billion
4. Monsters University - $900 million
5. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - $750 million
6. Thor: The Dark World - $700 million
7. The Lone Ranger - $650 million
8. The Hangover Part III - $625 million
9. Despicable Me 2 - $610 million
10. Star Trek Into Darkness - $600 million

Let me know in the comment section below what you think and which films you think will make the most money this year. Be sure to subscribe to be notified from any new feeling fuzzier posts, reviews and features. 

Read More

Voice of Reason #11: Trailer Trash

The Wolverine bares all in his latest trailer

"Right, that's it." I close my Internet browser and turn to my girlfriend in a huff; "There's no need to see that film now. They showed the whole film in the trailer."

Know the feeling? Ever felt that a trailer has shown too much? Then dear fellow, read on...

Don't get me wrong, I love a good trailer. Everyone knows that if done right, a good trailer can sell a movie that could potentially be a huge pile of crap. Believe me, I was conned into watching the terrible second Transformers because of half decent trailer. It has however, come to my attention that trailers of late can give away a little more than you would like.

Iron Man 3 was one film that managed to hold
something back; other studios should take note.

Cast your mind back to 2012 (if you can remember back that far that is); the big summer blockbusters comprised of the following: The Avengers, Prometheus, The Amazing Spider-man and The Dark Knight Rises. For months beforehand we were bombarded with endless teaser trailers, full-length trailers, release trailers and TV spots.

You just knew that The Avengers would culminate in a humongous New York throwdown with that massive alien snake thing. It wasn't hard to guess how things were going to go tits up for the crew of the Prometheus and everyone knew from the outset that Bane would get one over on Batman before isolating Gotham from the rest of the world.

The same can be said for each of this year's summer heavyweights as well. Iron Man 3 practically based its entire marketing campaign around Tony Stark's house going for a swim in the Pacific Ocean. You can't watch five minutes of television or click on any webpage at the moment without being bombarded by images of the Enterprise coming crashing down or Zac Snyder's Man of Steel taking flight. Don't even get me started on all of the promos for The Wolverine.

Every now and again a film has the ability to genuinely surprise me; I certainly saw no indication of Iron Man 3's big reveal in any promotional material. But I can't shake the nagging feeling that film trailers give away just a little too much in their attempts to show off all of their flashing pyrotechnics and CGI set-pieces.

All I ask is this; please Hollywood, hold something back to peak our curiosity. Just chill your beans and let the audience try and guess what is going to happen next. A film like The Avengers or Iron Man 3 is going to sell itself, without needing to throw every single explosion into a five-minute long trailer.

Read More

60 Second Film Reviews #4

A round-up of some of the most recent films that I've seen on both the silver screen and at home, 60 Second Film Reviews is a regular feature that gives you the low-down on a film without the waffle. This month, we have The Croods, 21 Jump Street, Safe House and Moneyball.

The Croods (2013)

Dreamworks go prehistoric in this cute take on 'the first modern family' in The Croods. 

After spending the last few years nipping at the heels of Pixar, Dreamworks' have taken a few steps back with this Ice Age/The Flintstones/Land Before Time carbon copy. It isn't as fresh and heart-warming as Kung Fu Panda/How to Train Your Dragon as it reheats old ideas and plot points. It does however, do so with a fresh visual palette and an injection of rib-tickling humour that doesn't render it pointless. 

The voice cast is impressive with Emma Stone, Nicholas Cage and Ryan Reynolds playing curious Eep, sceptical Grug and adventurous Guy respectively. The plot (the continents are shifting and threatening to destroy the family cave) is all explained in an inventive opening sequence before the family are introduced and the plot speeds along at a fairly rapid pace that should keep young'uns entertained.

So whilst it isn't the best and brightest animation the studio has ever made, it isn't a complete waste of your time. If you don't get chance to watch it in the cinema, your kids will love you forever if you get it on DVD.

I give The Croods: 6/10

21 Jump Street (2012)

A contemporary take on an 80's teen television series, 21 Jump Street sees two young cops (Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill) sent back to high school on a mission to uncover the source of a secret drug supply. For anyone who is a fan of police screwball comedy (The Other Guys, Hot Fuzz), 21 Jump Street is a no-brainer. It's witty, it's smart and it is one of the funniest films I have seen in a while. 

The first day on the job where the pair are left cycling across a sleepy park with nothing to do escalates into a hilariously silly chase whilst 

a sequence mid-distance where Jenko (Tatum) and Schmidt (Hill) are forced to take the drug their investigating in the middle of a school day is brilliant as they shout, run and hallucinate their way across campus.

However, the two biggest strong points for me were these; first, the self-referential humour which pokes fun at fact it is a remake and second, the heart. What surprised me most is the amount of sincerity both Hill and Tatum brought to the film at times. 

I give 21 Jump Street: 7/10

Safe House (2012)

Starring Ryan Reynolds and Denzel Washington, Safe House is about a fresh-faced CIA operative (Reynolds) who is tasked with escorting international criminal (Washington) from across Cape Town, South Africa right after their safe house is attached by skilled mercenaries. 

Safe House is really a film of two halves. The first half is great, a really tense and suspenseful thriller that sets up the characters, action and setting nicely. Everything is going nicely.

The second half is one that slows to a crawl and allows for all the energy to drain out. Tasked with spreading an already thin script out across a run-time that is around 20 minutes too much, the second hour of this film is one that lumbers and lurches along until a damp squib of an ending. 

Reynolds tries his best to cast himself in a Bourne-esque light but ultimately what can now be known as the 'Green Lantern' curse strikes again. Brendon Gleeson and Vera Farmiga offer supporting roles but the only real star here is the malicious Washington. 

It's a solid, if unspectacular and formulaic thriller that left me feeling a little underwhelmed. 

I give Safe House: 5/10

Moneyball (2011)

Wow, just wow. I haven't enjoyed a film as much as I enjoyed Moneyball in a long time (probably since watching Silver Linings Playbook or Side Effects).

The story of Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) who is the general manager of the Oakland A's, a lower-tier baseball team struggling to compete against the league's heavyweights. Based on a true story of how Beane and his young junior assistant Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) changed the way the game works for good, Moneyball is a touching and delicately-made drama that takes a niche topic and opens it up for anyone. 

It really is an all round fantastic film that should appeal to anyone, not just those who are fans of baseball. I know absolutely squat about baseball, but I still loved Moneyball. Both Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill act their parts brilliantly, the former giving one his best career performances and Hill completely breaking free of his 'high school nerd' typecast.

What makes this film so great is not just its spot-on acting, but also its cinematography. It really is beautifully shot with long-shots that capture the scale of the stadiums as well as plenty of mid-shots that linger on the emotion of Pitt's face.

Moneyball pretty much hits a home run (Yes, pun intended) across the board. Be sure to check it out.

I give Moneyball: 9/10

Read More