After a false start with Terminator 3, filmmakers are once again having a crack at the story of John Connor; the man fated to lead the human resistance against Skynet and its army of Terminators. Set in the close future of 2018, Terminator Salvation follows the final showdown between mankind and killer machines. A stranger appears; a man whose last memories are of being on death row. John Connor must decide whether the man is sent to annihilate mankind or fight alongside the human resistance.

This latest instalment of the Terminator saga is bold and ambitious. Where Terminator 3 disappointed with strained dialogue and unoriginal plot twists, Terminator Salvation gives a different experience. The action sequences are spontaneous, spectacular and unrelenting, but can make you dizzy as your eye has to catch up with sequences spliced together disjointedly. However, you certainly wont be disappointed in its pace, scale of explosions, battles and fast speed chases.

Christian Bale fills the shoes of John Connor well. Watching him lose his temper on screen makes you realise you don't want to get on the wrong side of Bale; an actor who appears intimidating both in and out of character. You may have heard about Bale’s much publicised outburst on the set of this Terminator film; finding the stream of obscenities on YouTube isn't hard. Bale’s apology on the incident included the claim that he was ‘in character’ at the time. That's method acting for you! Bale’s performance is strong and compelling, but at times a little overstated; being Batman may have gone to his head. When you hear the unnaturally husky Batman voice come out of John Connor’s mouth, you want to pass him a packet of cough sweets. But if you liked Bale in Batman then you’ll like him in Terminator Salvation.

Would a Terminator film be authentic if it didn’t include the Governor of California, Mr Terminator himself? Many of us grew up with the familiar sight of Arnold Schwarzenegger playing the killer robot from the future; the bad guy in the first Terminator film and the good guy in the second. Fortunately, Arnie does make a return, and he looks surprisingly well for a man in his 60’s - too well. An incredibly convincing CGI figure seems to have taken his place. The performance is almost indistinguishable from the man in the flesh, or should I say metal.

Terminator Salvation pays respectful homage to the first two Terminator films of the 80’s and 90’s. Repeated classic lines like “come with me if you want to live” and “I’ll be back” are real fan pleasers. The terrifying image of the polished steel Terminator skull and bulky frame from the original film is fully exploited in striking cinematography.

There are nods of acknowledgement to other classic action films throughout: Terminators resembling Transformers, a Mad Max-ian society in chaos, a terrifying similarity to the invasion of the War of the Worlds, and a touch of Shelley’s Frankenstein in the character of Marcus Wright. All the references make an enjoyable tale of science fiction horror.

The film does the Terminator saga proud as a fitting continuation, providing new characters and new concepts, nicely setting the scene for future films.

If you like the Terminator films - this is a must-see. And if you haven’t seen any Terminator films then go watch Terminator Salvation – you don’t know what you’re missing!

Last night I went to a screening of a new film with a friend and his girlfriend. He promised her and then somehow roped me into it.....

 

I'm using the info I was sent through about it below and adding where I feel necessary..... 

 

Margaret Tate (Sandra Bullock) has dedicated her life to her work. (Sounds like a good premise for a film set in New York...she works in a publishing company...)  The hard-nosed, overworked company head has put friendships, family and love behind her desire to be successful in the New York business world. However Margaret is Canadian (der der der) and when the INS (not the INS..she didn't fill in the form!) decide to not renew her work papers (OMG), she faces deportation to Canada. Unable to find any other options, Margaret forces her young assistant (Ryan Reynolds..and this was kind of a two way thing ...because he gets to become editor if he goes through with it...) to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. (ok, how does she force him? He's just in the wrong place at the wrong time and we are forced in to watching an awkward moment of "so we're getting married"..) 

 

In between this part and the "I love you!" we are treated to Reynolds gammy's 90th birthday in Alaska. He's from a rich family, the dad wants him to take over the family business..she falls into the sea....<> the grandma fakes her death.... there's an amusing "how did you porpose?" story...erm...oh a funny dance...a hispanic guy who strips, is a waiter and works in the local shop....oh and a dog gets caught by an eagle using some of the finest CGI known to man,

 

and that's it. nothing more...no high speed bus chases, aliens.....Just sandra bullock forcing ryan reynolds to marry her so she can carry on working....and you know what....and I'm not sure if I'm getting old....broody....or if it was just because I got to finally sit down for two hours...but it was actually an ok film.

 

However....wait for a rainy day....on DVD....take it home after you've been in the pub and say "darling, let's watch this movie!" 

 

The End 

There’s always been something of the pantomime about Star Trek. William Shatner’s offbeat stutter and Leonard Nemoy’s pointy ears whisked off to some cardboard planet to battle rubber clad midgets. It’s a kitsch universe of pastel uniforms and swooshy doors, right? Well, J.J. Abrams doesn’t seem to think so.

The spectacled supremo behind Lost and Cloverfield embarked on only his second directorial venture with a clear vision. To drag Trekkies into the 21st Century, to breathe some life into the empty Hollywood phrase “Reimagining”. This is a sexed up, high octane, badass universe – embodied by our new James T. Kirk (Chris Pine).

Pine has the clean cut looks of a straight laced American poster-boy, and perhaps he is. His Kirk, on the other hand, is a beer swilling womanising thrillseeker with a blatant disregard for authority. He is instantly endearing. That permanent juvenile smirk also provides the perfect channel for a stream of caustic one-liners that inject the picture with a surprisingly effective vein of humour.

This has the feel of a comic book origin story. The young Kirk is convinced into enlisting in Starfleet, thrust into a position of authority by the unhappy appearance of maniacal Romulan Nero (Eric Bana). The ensuing space-chase is as formulaic as any piece of action cinema, but Abrams injects it with enough pizzazz to maintain the excitement levels. More importantly, the first half of the film does such an excellent job constructing the characters that we have some interest in their exploits, no matter how predictable they might be.

This is not Kirk’s film alone, and the camera lavishes as much time on Zachary Quinto’s Spock as it does Pine. His rendition is more traditional, not least because Leonard Nemoy makes a time bending cameo in the second half. Logical and precise he emotes mostly through the furrowing of a brow, but enough fragility is exposed beneath his implacable exterior to make him a delightful foil for Kirk’s brash wit.

The consistent issue with origin stories is the lack of peril. The characters have to survive and so any danger in which they find themselves, no matter how technically excellent, has its heart cut out. The sci-fi conceit by which this problem is avoided sounds ludicrous on paper, but somehow it works on screen. Perhaps because the film just doesn’t seem to be taking itself that seriously, and there is a glimmer of real physics behind the idea.

What Abrams and co. have done is no simple thing: The successful melding of rich fictional and cultural history, 21st Century explosions, and believable likeable characters. By the time the credits began to roll I wanted more, and I sincerely hope I get it.

Joseph Ewens...

So I don't normally do film reviews, but I couldn't resist this.

James Bond goes all rogue in his latest adventure, he's still reeling from the death of Vespa in his last outing and is looking for (wait for it) Solace just about everywhere...London, Sienna, Bolivia, somewhere in the desert (it could be a kids book if it wasn't for all the fighting, killing and sex...James looked in the briefcase but there was nothing there, James looked in the caves but there was nothing there etc).

I would say that 94% of the film is some description of fight scene, 3% is plot and the other 3% some crap about a character who is going to die in five minutes anyway (Bond, you are coming with me). When did Bond loose his suave sophistication and more to the point when did he stop not knowing what he was drinking? 

Firstly let me tell you that Daniel Craig shouldn't have been Bond. If they wanted to make another Bourne then why didn't they just do that? Pick out someone who actually fits the Bond bill, tall, dark and handsome and not too built that he can't make it in to a goddam suit.

I want to see swift karate chops to knock a gun out of a crazed mans hand, I want to see sharks swimming around waiting to get fed but mostly I want to see Bond not being killed by incompetant evil villains when he really should have been. You get me.

Quantum of Solace was shit, I fell asleep, my brother fell asleep and my girlfreind also fell asleep.

Some questions, that I would appreciate an answer to;

How did Matthis got in the boot of the car and why the heck he didn't make a noise when they were driving?

How did the girl get covered in oil?

When Bond was at Tosca, why didn't the body guard just say he was a body guard and then why did Bond not deny shooting him? What a dick.

Jeez. Bring back George Lazenby.

A film about a cute as pie couple and their equally cute but ever so unruly pooch?  I feel I can safely assume that I speak for the general consensus when I say that, that sounds like a hell of a lot of fun right there.  Adapted from John Grogan’s best-selling memoir about ‘the worst dog in the world’ (simple-y the best concept ever I tell you) Marley and Me is thankfully not just about a bad doggy, luckily for us there is a little more substance to see us through.  Emphasis on the little as admittedly the canine does get a lot of screen time, no surprises there since his name does take up a good third of the title.  But for the non-die-hard dog lovers director David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada) has done a half decent good job of balancing the cuddly ‘aww isn’t he an adorably naughty dog’ moments with something that feels a little bit more real.  Something that doesn’t make us think that this might have been more appropriately produced by Pixar.  Though one cannot deny that the dog does make up most of the films flesh and fur, it is the marriage of John and Jenny Grogan (played by Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston) that is the bones of the story which at times is the only thing holding the story up.  And even then there is rather a lot of shaking in its foundations. 

It begins at the moment most heartwarming-romantic-comedy-dramas take a bow and wave ‘happy ever after’.  Everything is sunny and dandy, the newlywed couple have all these hopes and dreams; things they want to do, things they want to see and perhaps most importantly things they want to be.  For the first twenty minutes or so the ‘happy ever after’ trail looks just that, pretty damn swell.  Their boxes are being ticked and seemingly quick.  Marriage: Tick.  Job: Tick.  House: Tick.  Baby:...  oh no, no, no,  pause, not quite yet, that’s a little bit too much responsibility, so enter Marley, ‘evil, with a dogs face’.  And with the sound of this Labradors bounding destruction who could even hear the tick-tock of that biological clock?  So for a good 15 minutes John and Jen, (screen time, not real life time) they do indeed put that whole procreating shebang on hold.  What ensues is a tirade, some may say rather poignant tirade, some wouldn't, of what love and family life really looks like.  And guess what folks, it isn’t always pretty.  According to the Me part of Marley and Me (Marley doesn’t count he’s a dog) real life sometimes involves unattained dreams and buckets of sacrifices.  That whole idea that a 2 point 4 family life is going to be a ball is apparently a big ol fat lie, who knew eh?   Who knew It doesn't really unravel that way?  They lead you into a false sense of security and BAM you end up neck high in diaper poop and the soundtrack to your life changes to a rather scratchy version of your Mrs screeching at you.  Not to say that this is not a credible idea to explore but unfortunately watching a middle-class family play out a few tiffs which mostly centre around a dog doesn't really shout, 'great movie' it just screams 'get rid of the dog if your that unhappy, jeez'.

There are two and a half ways you could take this movie, depending on your tolerance for slightly undercooked mush.  The sensitive-spirited ones among us will leave the theatre all gooey and teary.  There’s a loveable pup, a Wilson/Aniston pairing and it's an easy viewing rom-com.  The more hardened audiences out there however, will at best take regular toilet breaks due to their interest levels flatlining with every second that the damn dog breaks something else in the house and at worst fall into a practically comatose, deadweight sleep where they dream that 101 Andrex puppies are slobbering them to death and are planning to gobble their remains after.  Those that don’t fall into either of these categories will most probably find the film moderately entertaining but  might find they have all but forgotten the movie by the time they have reached home and be thinking about what they are having for tea.