Movie 43

OMFG this movie actually exists. It is an actual thing that is a part of our wondrous universe. You can actually sit down and watch it. WTF...

Movie 43 is the most unlikely film experience I can imagine. I wish, I wish, I wish I was in the room when the filmmakers got the following actors on board to be a part of such a ridiculous film: Hugh Jackman, Kate Winslet, Halle Berry, Anna Farris, Stephen Merchant, Dennis Quaid, Naomi Watts, Emma Stone, Richard Gere, Elizabeth Banks to mention just a few. How? How did they get those people involved? How did they make Hugh Jackman have a set of testicles on his neck?!? How did they make Anna Farris want to get pooped on? How did they make Halle Berry get her (fake) tit out and make guacamole by smashing it into the avocado? How?!?! HOW?!?!

The filmmakers for this movie must be the best smooth talkers that have ever existed. I mean, think of all the amazing scripts and ideas flying around Hollywood and at the end of the day an exec in a studio somewhere said "sure here is $20 million to go make this film, it sounds great!" I’m gobsmacked. I think 10 or 15 years ago I would have died laughing at this film, sheerly for its crude and disgusting humour and how far it goes. I can imagine myself grinning and chuckling under my breath the whole way through, and talking about it at lunch at school, but the 30 something version of me just found it to be so insanely silly I couldn’t get past that to enjoy it.

The plot, just quickly, is that an older brother wants to get spyware on a younger brothers laptop and needs to come up with a plan to get him off it long enough to install it. He comes up with the idea that a banned movie called Movie 43 exists on the net somewhere. He then cons his younger brother to use his own laptop to find it and runs off with his younger brothers laptop to lookup porn in the toilet in the hope of installing spyware on it. Or something. Then every 'banned' movie with a title like Movie 43 is found by the younger brother and watched by him and you as the real audience. Each 'banned' movie is a skit involving the actors above doing insane things... and your mouth will be open, your eyebrows raised and your head spinning as they play out infront of you.

It’s pretty much up there as one of the worst movies ever made, but if you want to see a set of balls on Hugh Jackmans throat or Halle Berry blow the candles out on a blind boy’s birthday cake, or a naked fembot that plays music from her vagina then check it out for sure. Otherwise, you aren't really missing anything.

SCORE: 2/10

IMDB Info for Movie 43

The Lone Ranger

So The Lone Ranger is a bit of a weird movie. It has huge stars in Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer, is built on a known brand, has a mega budget, is directed by Gore Verbinski (who also directed Pirates of the Caribbean Trilogy) and made by Disney. You would think this would be a no brainer.

First off let me say that normally I dont really think about nor worry about how much violence or dark idea's are in a film. I quite like a good horror as you know and feel the dark sway to the comic book movies of late has been really great, but, when I go in to see a Disney movie that is a western starring Johnny Depp I'm expecting some fun, upbeat and humourous action mixed with a good story line. In fact I would go so far as to think that this movie would be destined more for young'uns and just checking found that this was actually M15+ (thankfully) and not PG13 as I originally thought it was.

The film is violent! For example, in the first third of the movie the bad guy of the film played by William Fichtner turns out to be a cannibal that eats the hearts of his victims. Halfway through the movie there is the complete destruction and genocide of an American Indian boys tribe and then in the last act a gattling gun mows down Indian Apache's as they ride on some white people. Its fairly obvious that the studio decided, in its typical way, that just because everything at the moment is 'dark' this needed to be aswell. This totally destroyed the film and for once I kind of wish they had just delivered the PG13 fun version of the film, which is different from what I normally say, but maybe I'm wrong sometimes.

If the movie was 45mins shorter, cut out all of the really dark violence of the bad guys, had a lot more Depp and Hammer humour and cut out the awesome but utterly over the top 45 minute train action adventure set piece that finishes the movie, I think I would be raving about this film as much as I did with the first Pirates movie. You can see the amazing film in amongst the crap and that makes it all the worse when you sit there watching the mess it ended up being unfold on the screen infront of you. Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp do share a real on screen chemistry and I wish that had been the focus of the movie. All of the evilness portrayed overshadows the 'Hero' of the movie and throwing money into expensive and over the top scenes that are unnecessary doesn't fix the other problems.

So do I recommend seeing the film? Well, yes, it certainly isnt the worst movie Ive ever seen. Its just an over ambitious, over budgeted, over edited mess of a blockbuster thats far too long. Go and see it at least once but dont expect to see the fun and adventure of a Pirates movie. Instead expect some very dark themes, quite a bit of violence, some very silly behaviour topped with a great bit of acting from the two main leads.

SCORE: 6/10

IMDB Info for The Lone Ranger

Stoker

WHAT THE?!

What a crazy film.  Very unique and beautiful yet pretty damn weird really.  But it worked!

This is Chan-wook Park's first go at an English language film with a Hollywood budget.  I'd like to draw comparisons with Stoker and his other films but to be honest I've only ever seen one of his films - Oldboy... which was pretty damn decent I might add.

Cinematography was very nicely done and I especially liked some of the transitions between shots.  One in particular going from a comb going through hair merging into a paddock of wheat & grass was really well done. 

Could fault the acting all round really although no real stand outs.  Nicole Kidman seems to play this type of role almost too well now, reminded me a bit of The Others.   I'm not too familiar with Matthew Goode who plays the central male role but he did well getting his creep on.

Definitely not your typical horror/thriller.  Apart from a few mildly tense scenes there are no 'scares' as such - it is more of an interesting journey watching the story unravel.  It definitely feels like a couple of styles combined but I can't put my finger on the two movies to compare to... sorry not being very helpful!  If you're not big on overly violent and scary horrors but don't mind a strange but interesting story with a bit here and there this might be the one for you.

7/10

IMDB Info

No One Lives

Not a terrible B-Grade horror really.  Quite well written with some interesting elements that give it a bit extra than the usual slasher. There was even a moment or two that could even be considered horror hall of fame worthy but these were soon forgotten amongst the generic padding. 

Unfortunately it's also let down by some pretty average acting although Luke Evans gave a fairly solid lead performance and creates quite an intriguing character.

Something kept me watching though and it had enough legs to keep me until the end. I wouldn't be in great hurry to see this but if it crosses your path late at night when the thirst for blood hits give it a crack.  It's like a hunter becomes the hunted crossed with a bit of Stockholm syndrome flipped around until you know what's going on but are never quite sure what will be next.

6/10

IMDB Info

Inside Jaws

Jamie Benning is an amazing person. He has created an entire genre of filmmaking called Filmumentaries. He has a website up which can be found at filmumentaries.com and I highly recommend the readers of this website to check them all out as you will most likely fall in love with all of them.

The type of Documentaries he creates are unique. He takes the original movie, such as Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars or Jaws and lays it down as the base track. He then scours the Earth and its Internet for any tiny piece of information, behind the scenes photo, interview, alternate music take, storyboard, concept picture or anything else he can find and fits it in with where it should go in the movie. So, you get to watch one of your favourite movies and learn all about the making of it as you do, it's an amazing experience.

I have watched his Star Wars ones a couple of times each (he has done one for each of the original trilogy) and they simply amaze me. The time he must spend gathering this info and putting it into one of his projects is months and months and months. He does it for the love of the films he has, totally unofficially and does not get paid for it.

I sincerely hope he does get paid to do this professionally one day and hopefully a studio or Mr Spielberg himself picks up on just how amazing his efforts are. Currently Inside Jaws has been released for 5 days and has been watched 53.5 thousand times! Thats 10,000 times a day. What an achievement.

I recommend checking it out below, or going to his website or Vimeo page to download it. Its over 2 hours long so its a commitment, but one definitely worth taking.

Inside Jaws, A Filmumentary by @jamieswb (2013) from Jamie Benning on Vimeo.

SCORE: 9/10

Cemetery Junction

Most misleading title ever for a film ... unless I missed something. Here I was skipping over this title in my list of to-watch movies as it sounded like a horror and I just havent been in the mood for taking a risk on horror. Then the other night after trying to watch Killing Them Softly, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back (for the millionth time), Scary Movie, and just not getting into any of them, I thought I would take a risk.

Cemetery Junction is written by Ricky Jervais and Stephen Merchant and is most certainly not a horror. It is in fact a heartfelt coming of ago period piece comedy! And a damn good one at that. For a quick tease told better than I ever could check this little piece out from the filmmakers themselves:

Gooddamn that cracks me up! Ralph Fiennes is indeed a grumpy bastard in this film and its in total contrast with the rest (except for Ricky who also plays a grumpy bastard). Its set in the swinging 60's in north London in a town called Cemetery Junction and follows a trio of young men who are desperately trying to figure out what they want to do in life. Its a smart, witty and engaging story line and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

The film is pure British comedy gold full of self depreciating humour, embarassing character moments, heartfelt double edged swords and lighthearted tradgedy. The only bad thing to say about the film is it doesnt really have much else except for character parts and if it maybe had a big set piece thrown in there somewhere or some action or adventure it would have been close to a 10/10 for me. As it is though its a great directorial debut from Ricky and Stephen who are two brilliant writers, creative geniuses and funny old bastards.

SCORE: 7/10

IMDB Info for Cemetery Junction

Sinister

I thought Holmsey had already reviewed this film and came on here to leave my comment after finally seeing it. But, I can't seem to find the review so possibly it was pre-website and email based. Thinking about my comment though I've decided it sums up absolutely everything you need to know about the film and so please find my review below:

"Fucking Scary!"

Enjoy :)

SCORE: 7/10

IMDB Info for Sinister

Hangover III

What is it with the third of everything coming out at present? Everything seems to be a trilogy and not everything should be, case in point being the Hangover trilogy. The first film is spectacular! What I mean by that is it isn't the best movie ever made, nor is it beautifully lit or acted, but the idea and the execution of that idea was purely original and done brilliantly. It should have been left just as it was: a one hit wonder of magnificent proportions.

The Hangover II was atrocious. It could have been as good as the first but I don't know what happened. It was a mess, made no sense, wasn't very funny and couldn't even be called a good rip off of the first one. I would have preferred to see what the team behind the Scary Movie series could have instead of the real filmmakers.

So why did I go to the third one if the second was so bad? In two words: Ken Jeong! That man is unlike any other human being that has ever lived and all I wanted or hoped for was 15mins of hilarity to come from him. As a backup I had heard that Todd Phillips (the director) had gone all out with this one to make a final statement of craziness and I had to see what he had created.

If you are a fan of the first film (and the second, if that's possible?!?) then definitely check out the third. The cast are all great together and Zach and Ken are both absolutely hilarious in that weird modern comedy which is unlike anything else I've ever seen. The movie is as about as good as was to be expected and the first half had a good amount of laughs and kept me entertained. The second half was not that good and when the credits rolled I turned to Holmsey in the theatre and we both said we felt let down and that it didn't deliver.

Then the credits faded out and the Hangover series gave the audience exactly what it wanted, what it had waited for 90mins to see. Stay for the credits. Stay for that final scene. Sit back and laugh your head off and be thankful you never have to watch another Hangover movie again. Except for the first one, on a boys night, and you have a scotch and coke in your hand!

SCORE: 5/10

IMDB Info for The Hangover III

The Place Beyond The Pines

Wow!

I love watching a trailer and getting excited for a movie with the expectation of one thing and then to watch it and have it not only live up to it's expectations but to break them alltogether.

I have to be careful here as I don't want to give too much away.  It's not an "amazing twist" type of scenario but it does all fall into place in such a beautifully written way I don't want to spoil too much.  But just in case..


**Spoilers Alert**


Ryan Gosling just went up another few levels for me.   He's always been a good actor but it's hard to rave about his amazing performance in the fucking Notebook.   But with movies since such as Half Nelson, Fracture and most importantly Drive his dark side has emerged and I think he pulls it off damn well.  His bad guy lost soul character Luke in The Pines is as believable as it gets if you overlook some over-zealous eye work from the make-up department. 

And every Yin needs a Yang and in this case we have Bradley Cooper who is playing a refreshingly different role from his usual macho touch guy Mr cool routine (which he does do well I admit).  He does not have the presence of Gosling but still gives a solid performance as the conflicted cop trying to deal with the events that have passed.

But this is no ordinary bad guy meets good cop and the central transition between the two characters just blew me away.  Now many a movie buff much more knowledgeable than I could probably give some examples of movies doing this before.. but I don't know any.   After watching so many generic movies of this genre it was a massive breath of fresh air and an act of writing brilliant (you will know what I mean when you watch the movie)

Now, not so unique is when a movie comes full circle.   However not many do it as well as this one.  As the final peaceful shot remained on screen before the credits rolled I was left with nothing but satisfaction. 

It's not even worth going into the technical stuff as it was all top notch.   Check out this movie at the cinema and enjoy a brilliant story, some gritty characters and a satisfying ride from start to finish.

8/10

IMDB Info

Iron Man 3

I am not huge fan of Superhero movies as the conceit that they are 'Super' also makes for a poor movie script by default. You know as the audience that they will never be in real danger, that they will not die by the end of the movie, nor will they have the same boundaries and restrictions as us mere mortals. That in itself means that any action scenes or tense, suspenseful danger never works well for me. Most Superhero films make up for this by either a) going all out batshit crazy with the action and destroying entire cities or countries whilst the Superheros who are fighting get slightly scratched armour or something, or b) they put a loved one of the Superhero in danger (or the entire world or universe) and as they are not 'Super' can therefore die or be destroyed.

Unfortunately the main plot of Iron Man 3 did not move away from the standard formula of a bad guy trying to destroy the world and take away the girl and for me, most of the action scenes fell a bit flat. Having said that though I quite enjoyed the movie. The reason for this, I think, is that it was written and directed by Shane Black. Shane also wrote Lethal Weapon 1 & 2, The Last Boyscout and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang so obviously knows his action movie genre. In all of those movies the action superstars are written in a witty, interesting and engaging way. It’s not Stallone or Arnie saying 12 words for the movie and just blowing up bad guys left, right and centre. It’s Riggs and Murtaugh bantering and looking out for each other or a complex gay Val Kilmer character just owning every scene he is in. I found that this trademark of Shane's writing came through in this Iron Man and was definitely the best thing about the film.

For the first time since maybe V for Vendetta (my favourite Superhero movie) I found myself kind of caring for this Superhero. I felt a little bit bad for billionaire Tony Stark and what he was going through and I enjoyed how it was written and shown on the screen. If you forget about the formulaic story arc and focus on the story of Tony Stark then I think this film is pretty good. Now, I’m not saying the action was boring or bad either! Seeing Iron Man flying around and fighting superhuman somethings was a blast. Especially when he called on his legion of Iron Men to fight for him as an army. The problem I have is as I said above, you know that he is never really in trouble. Nor is Pepper Potts or anyone on the planet other than the odd minion here or there, or unlucky civilians that get caught in the cross fire.

I think if this movie was allowed to jump out of the PG13 range and into the area Shane Black is normally more comfortable with and become an MA15+ or even R18+ movie it would have been spectacular. You could feel the parts that were dumbed down to appease the studio but you could see the original grittier idea's peeking through from time to time. I would love to see studio's take a risk and bring something like that out as the standard Superhero stuff is just getting a bit boring. If the focus of the film had truly been about Tony Stark and his bad decisions, the long standing consequences of those decisions and putting those he loves into danger then I might have cared more about what was going on in the action and fighting scenes. Instead I was entertained for the whole time but never really satisfied ... which actually sums up most Superhero movies for me in a nutshell.

SCORE: 6/10

IMDB Info for Iron Man 3