Skyfall

You only live twice...

A computer drive containing the information of MI6 Agents planted in terrorist organisations has been stolen and Bond is tasked with recovering it. While on the mission, Bond is severely wounded and presumed dead, until months later when he returns after learning that MI6 itself has become the target of a bomb attack. Bond forces himself to return to active duty only to discover that not only are his skills as an agent have been impaired, but that M's life is in danger.

After the surprisingly excellent Casino Royale and it's disappointing sequel Quantum of Solace, it is both understandable though strangely perturbing that Skyfall is a standalone entry into the new era of Bond films. While continuity in the 007 history is all over the place, there is the situation that certain plot points, primarily that of the criminal organisation known as Quantum, should have surely been expanded upon. As it stands, there is little in reference to Bond's lover Vesper or Quantum, two important aspects in the shaping of James Bond (Daniel Craig) as a character, and it comes as a missed opportunity. Nevertheless, we are presented with a new villain, Silva (Javier Bardem), who has a a pretty hefty grudge against M (Judi Dench). Silva is definitely the most interesting Bond villain of recent years and is a highlight of the story, but his introduction comes a little later than expected but this is a minor issue. Skyfall's plot is an interesting one: what starts off as a hunt against a formidable villain turns into a retrospective of Bond. However, this latter point never feels fully developed, and can appear at times to be tacked on to further the length of the narrative.The integral point of interest in humanising Bond is his feeling of betrayal by M for her lack of confidence in him. And then it is over. Just like that. The development of Bond feeling jaded against is quelled as quickly as it arises. The strong emphasis on humanising Bond will either be interesting to you or distracting after how subtly this thematic element is convincingly explored in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.
Nonetheless, it is the film's identity which is most at crisis. Skyfall constantly switches between passé and new-age 007 that it fails to find or even stick to an identity for the sake of consistency. Bond is more believable in the modern adaptation  but the film expects the audience to accept its questionable narrative logic for the sake of plot advancement. In past Bond films this would not be a problem but following Casino Royale, where plot advancement made some semblance of sense, in Skyfall this comes across as overreaching. 

Though there is no denying that the recent 007 films have all employed rather commendable performances from the entire cast, especially that of Daniel Craig who has provided a sense of concrete believability to the somewhat caricature nature of Bond. While Bond in Skyfall is much worse for wear than he has been, there is no denying that Craig does, at times, come off as far too stiff. This is a most noticeable when he has some quick words to spare upon someone, otherwise the forlorn act he presents can make you feel for him, though whether you choose to buy that is another matter. Judi Dench continues her stellar performance as M and its great to see how her role has matured from the Brosnan era to the Craig era, and with her added screen-time for Skyfall she definitely does not miss a beat. Rounding off the trio of important actors is Javier Bardem as Silva. Silva is a different type of villain compared to that seen in the previous two outings. He is one part happy-go-lucky, one part vindictive  and all sociopath, but still you never quite feel as if you should be rooting against him. Bardem portrays a charm that really pushes his character to the forefront of almost every scene he is in, outpacing both Dench and Craig with little effort. It is a pity that his character does not appear more often in the plot. The rest of the cast are all noteworthy in their performances. Naomi Harris as the operative Eve, Ben Whishaw as the new Q and Ralph Fiennes as Gareth Mallory, Head of Intelligence and Security all do a great job.

A welcomed change from Casino Royale, as echoed with Quantum of Solace, is the move towards a more diverse array of action sequences, such as vehicle chases. What makes the action that more effective are the locales themselves. There is a distinctiveness to the likes of Istanbul  Shanghai, Macau, Gunkanjima Island, among others, that provide each action sequence is distinct personality. This is only made better by the fact that there are some great locale shots outside of Bond doing what he does best.

As expected of a 007 film sexuality has its place but within moderation. Language usage is emphasised on the odd occasion while violence, in which there is quite a bit is never explicit.

Skyfall is a fun film to watch. There is nothing that can deny this. Good acting, an interesting plot, an interesting villain; good action sequences and some lovely cinematography have the making for a top notch film. However, as interesting as Skyfall is to follow, its narrative caves within itself at points. The strange turn to humanise Bond about two-thirds through seems at play against what came before, and this itself is heavily played to the point that Bond himself begins to lose much of the intrigue that makes him who he is. Additionally, some plot advancements, like Silva's plan, do not get the attention the audience deserves in terms of understanding how it ultimately works. And lastly there is the dual identities the film attempts to balance, but that never feels like it really comes off. Bond is still doing what he does to be the world`s super spy icon, but sometimes, maybe the world is not enough.

8/10

Water for Elephants

Departing along gently...

Jacob Jankowski (Robert Pattinson) has a bright future ahead of him: with the Great Depression ravaging through America he has the chance at a good job as a veterinarian and a stable life. This all changes when he discovers that his parents have been in a car accident and that he is illegible to own their house. He tries to renew his life's purpose and by chance comes across the circus troupe of the Bezeni Brothers where he meets the cruel owner August (Christoph Waltz) and dazzling Marlene (Reese Witherspoon).

Titanic on a train: you would be forgiven if this was your estimation of the film based on previews and for the most part you would be right. Based on the award-winning novel of the same name, Water for Elephants tells the story of a man who has to redirect his life after it is derailed from some unfortunate events. The story is told in a linear fashion and it is a pity that not more is made of the idea of reality vs. illusion which is a noticeable subject in the odd dialogue interchange. While this concept has more in liking with who a character really is and what information they know but do not let on, the concept is nevertheless never fully developed and ultimately explained by the characters themselves. Nevertheless, other themes present themselves in more subtle and interesting ways such as the images of railroads and water allowing the experience to not be all dictated. In the end, the film feels like a reworking of James Cameron's Titanic with a new setting and a new cast, but it most likely will not have the same cultural impact.

Romance becomes pivotal to the development of characters and the respective actors prove capable. Robert Pattinson will obviously be the centre of talk for the film and he does well for himself here. If you did not feel that Remember Me was a step in the right direction from a Twilight-esque future, then this film will surely give you the impression that Pattinson at least has the potential to mature his acting in a commendable manner. Witherspoon does an adequate job in her portrayal of Marlene and wriggles in workable chemistry between herself and Pattinson, but ultimately she does little to truly shine beyond her male counterparts. But experience is what steals the show with Waltz exemplifying a character who can pull you in with his charisma and idealistic hopes but who can also repulse you with his cruelty. Waltz is indeed the strongest link in the acting department but do not let his performance undermine the rest of the cast, especially the supporting roles who help create a holistically believable set of characters.

All of this is strengthened by some decent costume design and film direction which brings every scene to life gracefully. There is some questionable CGI use for animals towards the end and the environment does not get quite the showing it could but the film feels balanced and admirable in portrayal of one man's journey of self-discovery.

Sex and nudity are, at most, hinted at and language is mild at best. There is some violence mostly in the regard of fist fighting but also the rare off-screen violence towards an animal.

As mentioned earlier, Titanic on a train could very well be an apt explanation of the film. There is thankfully enough substance to allow the story to craft its own image but only just. This coupled with some slight CGI mishap and a narrative that does not always allow one to ponder on certain ideas, are not enough to truly hurt the overall quality. The story is lovely; the acting is strong; and the filming is delicate in what it offers. It may not be the Titanic of the time, but it is hardly a bumpy ride either.

8/10


Screen date: 15 April 2011
Release date: 15 April 2011

Tron: Legacy

More than just binary....

20 years after the disappearance of his father, Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund) receives a message from his father's rundown arcade. Upon investigating, Sam stumbles upon a secret room in which he is transported to the virtual domain of The Grid.

It has been many years since the original Tron was released and the sequel plays on this by having a narrative that addresses the very absence of a followup to Tron ,very much like the protagonist Sam has to deal with the mysterious disappearance of his father. In this sense, the audience is very much like Sam as Tron Legacy is clearly designed to appeal to a new generation of moviegoers. This does come with its own set of problem, namely that the story fails to utilize the computer programing jargon which made the original so interesting. Programming is touched upon at times, but it almost feels as if the writer's felt it may complicate the story unnecessarily. While this may be possible, it does not stop the fact that specified jargon would have created a far more convincing context for the plot, as well as create some needed depth to the themes which are presented. It is a pity because Tron Legacy has the potential for deeper discussion but it rarely presents the opportunity for such an endeavour.

Thankfully, the linear narrative is helped by an enthusiastic cast. Oscar potential is not on the agenda, but the actors are definitely watchable. The respective characters portrayed by Hedlund, Jeff Bridges and Olivia Wilde, who which the story revolves, are is likable in their ambition. Sam is a rebel who is wayward by his father's absence while Flynn yearns for nothing more but to see his son again. It is a compelling side story which brings about emotional response from both character, but unfortunately never ever convincing enough. Bridges also sports the chance to play Clu, the digital representation of Flynn. This is intriguing as ti allows Bridge's to also play a smug villain who is very different to that of Flynn. It is, however, disappointing to find Tron himself pretty much absent from the film considering how important he was in aiding against the MCP of the original film. Bruce Boxleitner gets some screen-time but it would have been nice for him to get some more.

Either way, the visual and audio of the film are an absolute treat. There are some stunning uses of CGI and special effects that create an impressive visual design, such as the modeling of a younger Bridges and the stark contrast between dark and light create an almost monochromatic feel. It should also be said that the use of 3D is amazingly effective, especially when helping differentiating the real world to that of The Grid. The musical score was composed by Daft Punk: their upbeat characteristic really aids the film's overall tempo allowing action sequences to feel more intense and any slow moments to be almost forgotten.

There are some sexualised women represented with tight bodysuits and profanity is hardly even mild. The film is action orientated but death sequences result in character deconstructing considering they are computer coding rather then physical beings.

Tron Legacy ends 2010 on a high note. While it lacks the ambitious nature of the original story and with acting that is not always entirely effective, Tron Legacy is nevertheless an absolute feast for the eyes and ears. The film's minor shortcomings are just that as Tron Legacy overclocks itself in presenting an entertaining experience.

8/10

Screen date: 31 December 2010
Release date: 31 December 2010

An Education

A cushioned lesson ...

Jenny (Carey Mulligan) is a 16 year-old girl who is attempting to get into Oxford University and has high promise of doing so due to her exceptional intelligence. However, she feels that life is far too linear and she wishes to be able to express herself by listening to French music and going to the cinema and theatre whenever she can, but her parents forbid this for the most part. On a chance encounter Jenny meets David (Peter Sarsgaard), an older man who allows her the freedom to live life the way she wishes to do so.

An Education is adapted from the memoir of the British journalist Lynn Barber, and is a coming-of-age drama set in 1960's London. The story unfolds in a very standard fashion but it is the very core themes of the narrative which keep it engaging. The main theme of the film revolves around the importance of a rationalized living, such as getting a formal education and having the chance of being boxed into a typecast, versus living life to the full and having an existence on the foundation of enjoyment. The films is also evenly paced and while it is a fun and interesting watch, there is a slight mishap to the overall narrative structure which hinders the film greatly. While the film is set up by trying to understand how Jenny feels about her current life compared to the life she could have, the film does little to dwell on the realistic consequences of the actions made by many of the characters, especially Jenny. Any poor decisions she makes in her life are gazed across far too quickly, and those by other characters are none the better. It is a disheartening aspect to the story, and one which would have made the film more cohesive with it's message.

Nevertheless, there is not much else to criticize the film for. The acting, for instance, is superb with some natural performances. Most of the screen time is dominated by Mulligan and then Sarsgaard. While the chemistry between both never really works all the time, they are still appear amply suited. The rest of the cast all support these two and even the likes of the talented Emma Thompson and Alfred Molina never imbalance the fine equilibrium. Each character also comes across as unique. For example, where Mulligan's Jenny is rational and tries to act sophisticated, Rosamund Pike's Helen is ethereal and frivolous. These contrasts seem simple but they work in addressing the core concerns of the film.

Director Lone Scherfig does an amazing job with her creative vision of the script even though she does not create a unique cinematic experience. For the majority of the film, the camera work is understandably controlled, and helps to convey the characters as they ought to be. However, as if to aid the thematic notion of the film, when Jenny in introduced to a more a world of artistic expression, Scherfig is quick to make the camera work more loose and free, heightening the film's very premise of rationality versus emotion.

Beyond some implied sex and nudity, An Education contains little in terms of content with violence and language.

There is a charming simplicity to An Education which allows the narrative to unfold without any hindrance. The acting is great, the direction is just as good, and the story has some important messages to impart to audiences. Though as a coming-of-age story, An Education steers clear of trying to have an impact with its core themes, and ultimately suffers for convenience.

8/10

Screen date: 31 July 2009
Release date: N/A (Durban International Film Festival 2009)

Drag Me To Hell

Horror returns in fine form ...

With a promotion on the line for the role of Assistant Manager, Christine Brown (Alison Lohman) is hoping to fill the position; however she has some competition for the role and decides to prove to her boss that she is capable of handling any situation with falls her way. One such situation arrives when Mrs. Ganush (Lorna Raver), an elderly woman, arrives to appeal for a third extension for a mortgage on her house. Christine ultimately decides to decline the woman’s request resulting in the old woman cursing Christine to damnation.

It is a strange storyline it must be said, but it works regardless of how ridiculous it may become. For many years American horror has gone the route of a serial killer or psychopath tormenting victims, but few rely on the plot device of the supernatural. The film starts on a note of suspense and continues to its end in this manner, and the fact that Christine is cursed to go to hell in a few days ensures that horror does not remain sporadic, but the norm. Plot development flows allowing for Christine to shuffle her curse with her personal life: she is virtually in every scene so the audience becomes caught up in her life. That said there are no subplots to distract from the main story arc: Christine is going to hell and she needs to stop that happening. This is slightly disappointing in regards to narrative depth but the film has clear indications into commentating about society at large. Christine has to struggle with her choice and whether self-gain is more important than the well being of others. Additionally a discussion is created about whether putting on a certain image to impress certain people, changes who you fundamentally are, or exposes your true self. There are fascinating levels of depth to the linear storyline if viewers so wish to engage with the text, but if not the audience will still be greeted with a favourably pleasant experience.

The acting front is workable in the film’s structure: it is never of a high level but it is commendable in giving the respective characters some life. No one actor cements their presence but it is Lohman’s character that rightly gains the most depth. At first it is difficult not to dismiss Christine’s predicament, but the story and Lohmans’ acting ability allows a new angle to be considered. Relating to Christine is never easy: while she is not an entirely virtuous person, she comes across often as too stuck up for her own good. This runs well with the films thematic factor which Raimi is able to explore but it does lessen Christine's overall charazizaton somewhat.

Cinematography is a fairly interesting facet for the film with many scenes being presented in a 1980’s horror manner. This could be easily frowned upon but Sam Raimi, who is clearly appealing to fans of his Evil Dead series, has a keen sense for direction making for sharp scene interaction and crazy imagery. This creates some great moments of horror and complementary sly humour: it is a unique blend but Raimi gets it spot on and the comedy does not go to dim the horror’s effectiveness. If there is a problem it is that some techniques are a little overdone, but ironically the horror scenes only keep getting better.

Horror films usually have certain expectations on regards to content, but Drag Me to Hell seems to disobey such notions. There is no sex or nudity, and language is almost non-existent. Violence is triggered through some suspenseful showcases and while they do have a factor of being grotesque, they are hardly close in realization to the all out gore and sadism of modern titles.

Simply put, Drag Me to Hell is one of the most enjoyable horror films of recent times. It has an interesting, supernatural storyline with interesting characters; reasonably good acting, though it could have been stronger; and intriguing cinematographic design, even if a little overused. There is even well formulated social commentary which really adds wonders in allowing the film to appeal on an intellectual level. Raimi’s grip on horror makes for a great deal of suspense and the added humour only makes the film all the more devious. All this is achieved with a minimal level of objectionable content, making the film less conformist to the horror genre as it stands and showcases Raimi at what he does best. Though the shining achievement of Drag Me to Hell is that it does what a horror should: not just simply gross out the audience but rather aim to scare and entertain them.

8/10

Screen date: 12 June 2009
Release date: 12 June 2009

Valkyrie

An interesting idea backed by a top cast...

Colonel Stuaffenberg (Tom Cruise) is one of the few men in the Nazi party who feel that their leader, Adolf Hitler (David Bamber), is more a threat to German instead of her saviour. He regrets the oath he took for Hitler and feels a desire to help Germany in any way possible. When a surprise attack on a German camp in Tunisia leaves Stuaffenberg seriously wounded, he becomes recruited into a group bent on killing Hitler at any cost.

While based upon real-life events, Valkyrie's soul is that of an action thriller and not a biopic. This is not to say that director Bryan Singer skews history but he merely doesn't try to authenticate the film in its entirety. The most obvious claim to this would be the lack of German accents from the main cast. Besides the German introduction from Cruise, all major characters keep their American or British accents intact. This is by no means problematic for the film, and many other greats have been in the same boat. A recent example is The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas: a stellar film where the cast was easily identifiably for their strong English accents even though they were German. The fact of the manner is, is that authentic accents would not enhance either films' core message, with Valkyrie's being about bravery in an unforgiving situation.

The story itself follows a fairly consistent flow with the odd moment being stretched out far longer then it ought to be or a story segment which is not developed enough, such as the lack of screen time to develop the relationship between Stauffenberg and his wife Nina (Carice van Houten) and their children. That said, it should be noted that there is an obvious lack of true twists in the story, unless you have no idea about Operation Valkyrie, but this forms a truly impressive feat from Singer, the story and the actors: there is a genuine feel in the film that there is a chance that Stuaffenberg could actually succeed and this only heightens the suspense.

The acting front is laden with experience and it shows. Cruise proves commendable as his role as Stuaffenberg and expresses the same level of vigour he has shown many films before. He is not the most ideal candidate but that does not stop him. However Cruise does have the rare weak moment where his delivery of a certain line comes across as stiff and out of character. The British cast is simply fantastic and virtually faultless. The likes of Kenneth Branagh, Bill Nighly and Tom Wilkinson bring a level of believability to the film that could have otherwise been lost and their presence is easily felt. Smaller, though not unimportant, roles go to von Houten, who shows a real sense of love for Stuaffenberg, and Bamber, who is just as every inch as creepy and menacing as the infamous Hitler himself. As noted, the entire cast is impressive and lift the film as a whole.

The music ensemble, while not overly memorable, supports the film at all times. The direction is no different. Bryan Singer brings a neat fluidity to the scenes which help the film's pacing but it is evident that he is not confident to allow the story or characters speak for themselves in many situations, and instead of being subtle, prefers to make sure the audience understands everything as it happens. In this respect the film loses much of its intrigue and naturalness.

Sex and nudity play no part in the film's proceedings with language being brief, if not strong on the odd occasion. Action sequences show off the violent content but there are far and few, never graphic and is comprises mainly of firearms with a suicide scene.

Valkyrie can be considered Tom Cruise's return to cinema, and thankfully the end result is a positive one. He is backed up by a decent storyline and a superb selection of actors. Sure the film could have used with some better pacing, more depth and subtlety; and the lack of German accents do possibly ruin the experience if you allow it to do so, but these problems do not hurt the film in any serious manner. Valkyrie might lack the literary impact to allow it to be phenomenal, but that does not stop it being watchable and exciting.

8/10

Screen date: 30 January 2009

Release date: 30 January 2009

Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi

Delightful tale on love...

When Surinder's (Shakrukh Khan) mentor dies of a heart attack, Surinder is forced to fulfill his mentor's dying wish: to marry his daughter. Surinder complies with his mentor's wishes however the marital bond between himself and Taani (Anushka Sharma) is merely for the sole purpose of allowing Taani a place to live and not one of love. As an introvert, Surinder finds it difficult to express his deep love but finds a solution when Taani joins a dancing competition: transforming himself into Raj, an extrovert and flamboyant man who catches the attention of Taani.

The story gets off to a slow start and steadily gains pace as the film progresses and this greatly mimics how Surinder's life changes from routine to excitement. At heart the film is a simple love story, echoing how Surinder fails to attract the attention of someone he loves and having to become someone he is not in order to do so. There is a nice, simple message to be learnt here and the love story is not entirely clichéd so the film does have a somewhat refreshing take on the ingrained romance tales of Bollywood. This does not however stop the many scenes where Surinder is battling with his love for Taani becoming a little repetitive by the film's end. With a little tighter editing on these parts the film would have also cut a little off its long run time but the film's length is a minor disturbance at best. The film is also fairly humourous, but not quite like Dostana's minute-by-minute comedy. As well the humour does not feel constructed but instead natural giving the context of some scenes a fairly real undertone.

There is a slight mishap on the subtitling for English viewers. There is the odd spelling mistake and there are a few moments where the subtitling makes some comments from a single character appear as if one character begins and another ends of the sentence, when it is evident that is not the case. Sadly the credit sequence lacks subtitles altogether and the credits are important in gaining an understanding into the aftermath of the ending with a monologue. While it can be accumulated as to what is being talked about, the monologue itself is fairly humourous and English viewers will e missing out.

Surprisingly the acting ensemble is stronger than expected with even the minor characters being more than adequate to the job. Of course Shahrukh Khan is as amazing as ever and anyone who thought he might be losing his shine will discover he is not. In the film Khan has to portray two different personalities for the same character as he attempts to live a double-life. His nuances in the shy and uncertain Surinder are heavily contrasted by his performance as the outgoing and hip Raj, and Khan does so with consistency. The biggest surprise is Anushka Sharma. Her debut performance is delightful, full of vigor and, most importantly, believable whether her character is full of joy or sadness. You would be hard pressed to say she was an amateur. In fact she embodies a top notch Bollywood actress with good acting coupled with a natural prowess for dancing. Sharma makes the music sequences she is in far more enjoyable to watch then they ought to be.

That said the music, and accompanying dances, is a slight disappointment. Neither category is bad by any means but they don't reach the optimal level of excitement to truly heighten the love story. But as said Sharma does appear in her element in these sequences and Khan's experience shows through so any sequence with these two dancing together is a worthwhile watch.

There are no sexual connotations, violence and very little use of language, making the film a true family treat.

Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi is an amazing film which tells an equally amazing, albeit simple, story. With stellar acting, especially from newcomer Anushka Sharma who compliments Shahruhk Khan well, and good detail to creating a natural context, it becomes a pity that the film is let down by its musical sequences. They are not bad but not up to par with the rest of the film, and when coupled with other niggles the film is unable to be as moving as it potentially could. Still it's a worthwhile film and not one to be missed.

8/10

Screen date: 16 December 2008
Release date: 12 December 2008

Available on Channel24

Dostana

Sexy though not without some smears...

After bumping into each other by accident Kunal (John Abraham), a photographer, and Sameer (Abhishek Bachchan), a nurse, end up wanting to rent the exact same apartment. Due to the limitations that no men are allowed to rent out the apartment, Sameer comes up with an idea that both Kunal and himself pretend to be a gay couple. However while this plan allows them to get the apartment, it proves to be a problem as they both men become interested in their other roommate, Neha (Priyanka Chopra), a gorgeous and intelligent woman who works for a fashion magazine.

The story for Dostana is a combination of unique and unoriginal. While the gay couple idea is not commonplace for Bollywood films, it does share some similarities with a recent Hollywood film. But beyond two guys pretending to be gay, Dostana does very little to differentiate itself from the flock of romance films, and this has to be attributed to post-Interval which is slightly disappointing. The second half of the film is not bad by any means, but the humour, vigour and originality which makes the first half of the film an absolutely wonder to watch becomes dampened somewhat due to the strange change of the leads becoming somewhat childish. Thankfully the musical score, acting and choreography never falter, so the film does have a strong structure throughout.

The characters themselves are very well detailed and the writers have done a good job to distance the characters of Kunal and Sameer while giving them common ground. Where Kunal is immensely handsome with a built body, Sameer's charisma helps him attract the women. This is deepened as the film progresses with both have separate forms of interaction which are easily acknowledged from their specific personalities. Neha is a bit more stereotypical and not quite as complex as would have been hoped. In fact, this could be the films one flaw: a lot of the depth is merely skin deep.

The film begins with a musical segment and a very upbeat one at that. As mentioned, the level of music and choreography never wanes and remains a welcome addition whenever a segment does appear. Dostana also bases itself in humour and a lot of it to boot. While the level of humour dies out in the second half, the quality does not. The majority of the humour is based around the gay relationship and what makes it work so well is the acting. In one scene where both Sameer and Kunal devise a story on how they met, their attempts at acting gay are not exaggerated so as to mock, but done so because of how both Sameer and Kunal think gay people act. Another aspect which makes the humour so much fun is the constancy at which is portrayed.

The acting quality is high as well with excellent performance from the entire cast. Abraham showcases why he is a highly capable actor though there is the rare occasion where he does not feel quite up to par with either Abhishek or Chopra, who are more easily able to gel given their recent pairing in Drona. Abhishek continues to find his peak acting ability when he needs its most and Chopra's continues her wonderful form from Fashion and nears the end of the year on a high note after a few mediocre efforts in Love Story 2050 and God Tussi Great Ho. The supporting cast of Boman Irani, Kiron Kher and Booby Deol compliment the leads with some genuinely good acting, with Irani and Kher adding to the intense humour of the film.

No violence or nudity though sex is a thematic element to the film. Language is minimal in scatological form.

Dostana is a film which wants to break away from the norm but ultimately cannot, and as such the latter arc of the story is a slight disappointment. The story turns into a typical romance after it promised such a unique premise, and the second half lacks the overall strength of the first. Nonetheless, Dostana is a brilliant film which infectious humour and sex appeal, though lacks the ability to truly target its core message.

8/10

Screen date: 14 November 2008
Release date: 14 November 2008

Available on Channel24

Taken

Exhilaration with modest substance...

As an ex-government special ops unit, or 'preventer', Bryan (Liam Neeson)is living his retirement years in hope of being more involved in the life of his 17-year-old daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). While overprotective, and somewhat paranoid, of his daughter's well-being due to the severity of his past career, Bryan reluctantly allows Kim to travel with a friend to Paris. However the trip proves disastrous as both Kim and her friend are kidnapped by Albanian sex-traffickers.

The story unfolds in a very mechanistic manner and as such also plays out in a linear and expected fashion. This does not make for a lesser story, but it does feel too conservative for the film in its entirety, and the end result is a film which lacks the complexities which the themes explored involve. Still it is entertaining and thankfully never falters, though some events are somewhat out of realism's grasp. By the film's end, Taken has a profound impact due to its subject matter. Nothing is overly explicit and the theme of the sex-trade is not dealt with meticulous realism, but it is captured well enough to make it seem tangible. Half the reason is due to the the directors ability to make the characters appeal on a personal level.

Bryan's concern for his daughter is touching, though perhaps a little overbearing first. But when danger comes to Kim, Bryan no longer appears to have any fault: he was right in his judgement. This is not a problem, but in fact a keen reminder of the role a parent plays in their child's life. Neeson plays the role, for the most part, quite convincingly. He shows some genuine concern, and when faced with the task of an action role, Neeson kicks into gear with a riveting performance. However there are moments where he comes across as mundane, and not totally involved with his character. Maggie Grace and Famke Janssen play adequate supporting roles with both showing believable emotion at the dire and horrifying situation the character Kim finds herself in. Though it must said that Maggie has a very strange way of running that can seem rather bothersome; perhaps that is he way of running, as weird as it looks, or maybe she was an ill choice to play a 17-year old.

While an integral theme is that revolving around the idea of sex, there is none shown in the film. Nudity is also not shown though some women come close. Language is almost non-existent though blasphemy does appear every once and a while. The film is quite strong on violence, though it is neither gory or bloody. Fights involve mainly hand-to-hand combat with a healthy does of gunfire. It is all quite engaging and exciting to watch, with Byran coming across as a more complete and violent version of Jason Bourne or the rebooted James Bond.

As perhaps gathered, the film is not exactly realistic though it is the sort of film which could and deserves to be so if it wishes to rank among the best of cinema. This aside, Taken is a thoroughly enjoyable film with intense action, marred by a few inconsistencies and lack of foresight into the film's overall image.

8/10

Screen date: 20 September 2008
Release date: 12 September 2008

Rock On!!

A new and high point in Bollywood filmmaking...

Starting up a rock band by the name of Magik, four friends have the dream of shooting to stardom with their rock music. When this dream never sees the light of day, the band split and has little contact with each other member. After 10 years, their lives become interwoven once more and the decision is made to attempt to reunite the bonds of the past.

The story is presented in an intriguing fashion jumping from the past to the present at will, but it never becomes distracting. This change goes to compliment the film in many ways. Not only does it make the viewing more interesting, but it helps to better understand the emotional and mental struggles of the main characters. The two most notable are Aditiya (Farhan Akhtar) and Joe (Arjun Rampal), with the former leading a prosperous life as a business man while the latter is barely able to make ends meet. The film is relatively easy to understand throughout but that doesn't mean it lacks the depth. There is a great sense of duality and confliction which arises as the film evolves. However the film can be seen to be a tad optimistic about certain factors of life, though it is nothing detrimental to the film as a whole, especially when the film has some melancholic moments. There is also a factor overlooked in the story: when the band attempts to reunite it appears to have no effect on the busy lives of those involved in the business world, notably Aditiya, with a similar social problem only affecting Joe.

There is a minor problem in regards to the English subtitling whereby spoken English is incorrectly subtitled, at one point even changing what was said entirely, though it was an unimportant scene of dialogue.

On the acting side, the actors perform quite well. Rock On!! marks Akhtar's acting debut after success with script writing and directing, and he adds another skill to his growing list of talents, even that of singing. He is well suited with strong presence next to Rampal who plays a more delicate role. They both play off one another extremely well and the chemistry between both shows whether in normal interaction or when the band is performing on stage. But this is not to say that both remain constant opposites of one another, for both have these subtle moments when they reverse characteristics, but it so dependent on the situation and goes to show the complex structure of the characters themselves, with character development being apparent, though perhaps not as much as one would hope. The remainder of the cast aids both main actors successfully creating a very believable context for the film.

The core highlight of Rock On!! is its musical score. It you enjoyed the snippet provided by the preview then you are bound to enjoy listening to an array of exhilarating track, complimented with a couple of slower pieces which allows for added variety. No matter what track is being played Rock On!! presents one of the most consistent soundtracks to grace a Bollywood film in a while. Also the production values are absolutely amazing for a Bollywood film. Rock on!! does not feel like a foreign Bollywood film at all, with the whole film feeling like a mid-to-high production Hollywood film. This is achieved with some masterful directing by Abhishek Kapoor with every scene, especially when Magick performs their music, seeming well calculated. However this does not stop Kapoor choosing some strange and rather unnecessary direction for certain scenes but this is thankfully very rare.

In what has been an up-and-down year for Bollywood blockbusters, Rock On!! amazingly is able to remain one string above most of the rest. There is very little to fault beyond the simple story and questionable cinematographic decisions. Rock On!! is as complete a package as you would hope for, and for a film which doesn't appear to be as widely acknowledged as other Bollywood blockbusters, Rock On!! is a true delight.

8/10

Screen date: 29 August 2008
Release date: 03 September 2008

Sakar Raj

Engrossing till the end, but not exactly there...

Anita Rajan (Aishwarya Rai) proposes the development of a power plant for the rural region of Maharashtra, but is advised to meet with Sarkar Nagre (Amitabh Bachchan), a gangster who is worshiped as a leader of Maharashtra. While Sarkar sees the proposal as absurd, his son, Shankar (Abhiskek Bachchan), thinks otherwise. Shankar is able to persuade his father to accept the proposal for it will allow the development of the land, thus helping the rural villagers in the region. While campaigning for the villagers approval, Shankar gets an unforeseen opposition movement.

As a sequel, Sakar Raj proves a worthy entry in the series: the original was clearly an adaption of The Godfather, while Sakar Raj is easily an original story, but the links to The Godfather are still present, and sadly taint the film's overall image as a unique piece of film-making. Nevertheless, the story which is presented, a political tale of power and revenge, is fairly engaging, with the first half keeping more in kin with drama, allowing the second half to up the tempo with violence, and it works. It should be noted that the violence not exactly tame, with the bloody aftermath of bodies being shown. They are not particularly gory, but that doesn't stop them being strong visual images. Now while it would seem as if the film lacks the story towards the end, this is not the case: it is merely because the consequences of certain actions which prevail in the first half, meet their timely demise in the second, while branching the story into further intrigue. A definite striking point of the film story is its conclusion, which is hard-hitting, and makes up for the few tedious moments the film presents. However the film's dialog does hit a few hiccups everyone and a while. There is one or two unnecessary one liners which sound out of place, but the real problem comes from certain lines which are obviously meant to contain a high degree of philosophical backing. Yet the depth some of these lines attempt to achieve, is not always exact, and feels as if the character speaking wishes to present themselves as far more intelligent that they actually are. It is a small niggle, but nonetheless noticeable, as it dampens the effect of some scenes.

Acting greatly commends the story, with no evident inadequate moments. The forerunners, Rai and both Bachchan's, are able to steady the film's progress, allowing the lesser actors, though still vital in the film's entirety, to not drain themselves from the overwhelming plot. Though with this said, these actors don't exactly come across as memorable and are easily overlooked by the many other facets of the films production. While Rai is underused, and never really portraying herself as well as she does, the most unique aspect of the acting comes in the form of both the characters Sarkar and Shankar. Sakar, the lead from the precursor film, plays a secondary role to the character of Shankar, who Abhiskek is able to portray with strength. He dominates his scenes, and its pleasant to see Abhiskek really start to push his roles further. However, while fans of the original might feel that Amitabh is somewhat slated, that is not the case. He merely plays a subtle role which escalates into something far greater as the films inches closer to its conclusion. As stated earlier, the conclusion is excellent, concluding the film on a very skilled footing, allowing room for a sequel.

The director, Ram Gopal Varma, is a great director, and he proves himself once again with excellent cinematography for most of the film. There are various 'Bollywood'-esque filming choices, which seem unfitting for the type pf film being achieved, but it is a characteristic which one couldn't have really expected to be missing. Like some of the best Bollywood dramas, Varma chooses not to include the typical dance and song routines expected of Bollywood films. While some might be disappointed, it is a good move on part of the director.

It is a pity, however, that the film's music is somewhat off key. The used tracks greatly enhance the tension, but they get used over ad over for almost no reason. Varma seems somewhat determined to create an engaging atmosphere for the entire film, when is really is not necessary. It can only be seen that Varma is trying to hard to make Sakar Raj succeed, especially after the dismalness of his previous film: Ram Gopal Varma Ki Aag.

Sakar Raj is a good follow-up to Sakar: the acting is excellent for the most part, and works well with the intriguing story. It is just disappointing that some story issues, coupled with a few dialogue and music problems are easily apparent. Varma weaves an good story, though his problem with Sakar Raj, is that he so wishes to make Sakar Raj an enjoyable film, that he ends up losing sight of some minor problems which tarnish the final product.

8/10

Screen date: 06 June 2008
Release date: 06 June 2008

Iron Man

Gold but red...

As a weapons manufacturer, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is also one of the most well recognized men in the world due to his billionaire status forged by his genius. After showcasing a new missile, known as the Jericho, in Afghanistan, his convoy is ambushed, and Tony is taken prisoner. Spending three months captive in the mountain range, Tony is forced to rebuild the Jericho missile for his captives. Tony instead designs a device that keeps his body from dying, due to the shrapnel he received from the ambush, and as well a robotic suit to help him escape. With these new inventions, and experiences in captivity, Tony Stark’s view on his life, takes a drastic change.

One thing Iron Man’s story is not, is hard-hitting, which is disappointing considering the films opening half. It is relatively simple to follow, and a tad frivolous, but the film is quite enjoyable nonetheless. The script is well-formed, following a logical structure with some genuinely good humour to boot, and it’s only imperfection comes in the form of a very clichéd villain. This element also forms some predictability in the film’s plot, but it is a minor issue at best. An element which did irritate me was the level of convenience within the story. Yes, most films have moments of convenience, but Iron Man makes them quite noticeable. Such an example being how Stark's laboratory of sorts, somehow is able to be used as a launching pad for getting the Iron Man armour attached to Stark, without there ever being any mention that Stark modifying the place for such an action. It is as of the laboratory was built for that purpose the entire time and it just feels a little off-putting. This makes the concept of believability strained somewhat, even within the context of the film’s universe, and it is not just limited to this single occurrence, but a few others, such as how the Iraqi guards had no idea or any suspicion on what Tony Stark was building, even when they had security cameras all over Stark’s cell.

Thankfully the acting is of a good level, with Robert Downey Jr. stealing the show, with his performance as Tony Stark being absolutely perfect. Be it when Tony is acting in a casual free-spirit manner, or when he is serious, and devoted to cause for a better world. Performances by Jeff Bridges, Terrence Howard and Gwyneth Paltrow make for commendable efforts, but sadly the latter two have a few awkward moments where they seem honestly bored with the material or incapable to convey the right emotions, such as Paltrow in highly tense scenes. But perhaps the worst example of acting comes in a very unlikely form: Stan Lee's cameo. Simply put, it was horrible and clearly not well thought out.

The computer graphics are at times are amazing, but at others times, a bit of a letdown. The good times sport some impressive visuals, especially the sequence with Iron Man flying while attempting to survive an attack from two fighter pilots. Yet this doesn't stop the film having sequences where the Iron Man suit looks like a cartoon rendition, seemingly negating the realistic concept of the film in general. Action sequences are quite fun to watch with some excellent visual effects, but it is a pity that the final fight is far too short and somewhat of an anticlimax, and thus never fully satisfies the concept of the fight in its entirety.

I also felt the directing to be disappointing. Jon Favreau has some good moments, and I go back to the Iron Man and aircraft sequence, which really is outstanding, but Favreau has this annoying habit of having a left to right sweeping scene transition. It is as if he was trying to create this comic book effect with the transition and this ultimately comes to my main complaint of Iron Man: it is unsure whether it should attempt being a realistic portrayal or remain like its comic book form. It is a hybrid, but one that doesn't work all that effectively. It can be annoying to see a scene that resembles a good quality film, just to be followed by one that seems straight out of a comic book. How the sequences are structured in both mediums work differently, and are, in this case, not aptly suited to be used side-by-side. I feel that if they wanted a realistic approach, to go full out with that and not diverge into comic book proportions, and vice versa.

The film is virtually without any swearing or nudity, but there are some implied sexual imagery, such as the very brief encounter with Tony and a female journalist in his house. The extreme violence is left for off-screen purposes, and involves a lot of killing with armed weapons, and the cries of the victims are quite noticeable. The on-screen action is pretty much the standard comic book hero affair with lots of melee combat, and explosions.

Iron man is a wonderful example of a good comic book-to-film creation. While lacking the same maturity of Batman Begins, Iron Man proves to be the best Marvel film available, ousting out the likes of the original Spider-man and X-men 2. And this is because the film doesn't attempt to dumb itself down to appeal to a greater audience, or focus itself on too many elements: it keeps things relatively simple. Instead Iron Man tells the story of Tony stark, a man callous about the world in general, transforming into a man who respects not only himself, but those around him. With very good acting, a well structured story, Iron Man’s only problems are a few inconsistencies and its inability to support a dual personality approach. It's no Batman Begins, but then again, it doesn't need to be.

8/10

Screen Date: Thursday 01st May 2008
Release Date: Friday 02nd March 2008

Enchanted

Surprisingly spellbinding...

'Another Disney movie?' Let's be honest, who hasn't yet made this phrase in complete awe as to why Disney still continue to slowly butcher the masterpieces of many years back, with features that are simply substandard in comparison? But on account of Disney's latest venture, it appears as if the animation-dominated company, is finally shifting its gears with the deliverance of the suitably titled: Enchanted.

Living in a fairytale world known as Andalasia. Princess Giselle (Amy Adams) is filled with thoughts of a dashing prince, later found to be Prince Edward (James Marsden) and the chance to share that one true kiss with him. When both unexpectedly meet, a marriage proposal is suggested and after merely a day of knowing one another, both Giselle and Edward are to be wed. However, Edward's step-mother, Queen Narissa (Susan Sarandon), has no inclination to allow her throne to be given to another, so she decides to be rid of Giselle by sending her to another world which is devoid of the characteristic happy endings of fairy tales. Giselle ends up in the real world, more specifically, New York City. Here the harshness of social life begins to tug at her, but an unlikely friendship with divorce lawyer, Robert Philip (Patrick Dempsey), helps her to adjust.

Enchanted portrays a bizarre story with some of its main characters jumping from a realm of fantasy (animation) into reality (live-action). And it's this fantasy/ reality exposé which guides the film along. For Giselle, the real world lacks the sparkle, optimism and general goodness which dominated her beloved world. Instead she is presented with self-centeredness and social dismay for aspects of life such as love. This is what makes Enchanted so interesting to watch: the general contrasts of two opposing worlds, and how both can find similarities, even if the list is little. A noticeable scene involves Giselle attempting to clean an apartment with the aid of animals; however she is presented with rats, fleas and roaches: a complete change from the doves, deer and chipmunks she expected. The film never goes about dismissing that there are reasons for negativity in our world, but it does provide reasons as to why the world should be filled with more optimism and hope. Thankfully this is never to the point of being mushy, or numbing on happy pills. And this is the films greatest achievement: keeping everything seemingly realistic and thus tangible for the audience to believe in. I did however have an issue with Giselle being able to name one or two items that clearly could not have been from her world, and there is no evidence in the story to prove that she was told beforehand.

The film also has its fair share of humour. While it's not on the level of making you laugh yourself silly, the humour does a good job of making you chuckle and keeping a smile upon your face. The film even goes as far as parodying some elements of a Disney animation. If anything, the film becomes stated in its meaning, obviously to help the younger children, but luckily there are drops of symbolism and references to a few other Disney fairy tales, which help deepen the experience for the older generation. An aspect which must be highlighted is how Enchanted breaks the stereotype of the fairytale maidens. Usually the damsel is always a subversive character, always relying on the strength of Prince Charming. However in Enchanted, we are presented with fairytale females who have self-control as are willing to be assertive. Yet this happens only towards the end and completely comes out of nowhere. This brings about my main complaint with the film: it is a few minutes too short. Like my previous point, there is not enough time to sufficiently enhance the characters attitudes and emotions, and the opening animated sequence is far too quick in its aim. Yes, we know that in Disney films the pair of lovers will met and live happily ever after, but this is always done after we are able to understand the characters better. The everlasting love between Giselle and Edward in the beginning of the film serves as a little less emotive as it should have been because of the lack of a necessary buildup. Also, I felt the ending was far too predictable. There is a good chance that you will guess the specifics of the obvious fairytale ending, about three quarters through the film. As well, the ending is far too brief and basically kicks out the reality notion the film does well, up until the end, to convey.

If there is one element to consider of an animated feature which Disney usually gets right, it would be voice acting, and while Enchanted contains very little animated sequences, the voice acting is handled superbly. Best yet, the actors translate quite nicely into live-action where the acting ability is, while a little over-the-top at times, noticeably strong. Praise must be given especially to Adams who is utterly exquisite.

Whether it is the carefree innocence of Giselle, the simplemindedness of Robert the bedazzlement of Edward, or even the evilness of Narissa, every respective actor brings a realistic approach that works within the framework of not only their own and the other characters, but the situational context as well. The supporting characters of Pip (Jeff Bennet in animation; Kevin Lima in live-action) and Nathaniel (Timothy Spall) prove just as capable as their leads. The film also expectedly sports a musical aspect, with
both Giselle and Edward being the forerunners of this department, and they both deliver great performances, with a piece by Adams being a high point in the film.

It is, however, a pity that the love interests of Giselle and Robert, Edward and Nancy (Idina Menzel) respectively, get a bit too little screen time. While their participation within the story is not nearly as important as the characters of Giselle and Robert, they are, by the end of the film given a major story arc, but little characterization to support it. Also, while a minor issue, Giselle's character appears as being a hint too childish in her naivety in the live-action segments, while her animated self is aptly suited. It would have also been a nice addition to include a bit more musical pieces but what is provided is, at least, sufficient.

As a Disney film, one can expect content that is appropriate for the whole family. There's no sex, nudity albeit a scene with Adams in a towel after a shower and a nude statue. There is minute, non-hard language use, and violence only rears itself in a small quantity towards the end of the film.

Enchanted is easily one of the best family films to grace cinema in the last few years. Regardless of your demographic, there is bound to be very little any movie-goer can find wrong with this experience. Yes, it falls short of being ranked amongst the top-tier, but it just makes for such a compelling case study of our world, and is just so fill of love that it almost breaks my heart not to add another point to the overall score. Enchanted will make you feel exactly so, and thank goodness for that.

8/10

Screen Date: Sunday 16th December 2007
Release Date: Friday 21st December 2007