I don’t know what it is that has never really worked for Downey, but is has certainly re-established himself since Iron Man came out. He can carry off the narcissistic Tony Stark like no one else, and is definitely fun to watch.

The concept of Iron Man itself is one of those comics that passed me by. Of course I know of Iron Man, and a basic understanding of the story but beyond that I really don’t know how Iron Man fits into the Marvel universe. Some of that history is coming out in this film, along with references to other films in production. I counted three, but I might have missed something.

So how does this one stand-up? In short it has its moments, but overall it does not have the same feel or impact of the first.

What’s happened?

This is still a great film! There is plenty of action and the effects are even better than the first film. But it just does not have that feel that makes the first film so much fun. In the first you have a very gritty opening and the growth of stark from a self-obsessed arsehole to self-obsessed super hero.

Here I didn’t feel there was much in the way of story. There were plenty of characters, and quiet a few of them were very interesting. From Samuel L. Jackson’s Nick Fury, or Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow but none of them had much time to do anything.

There was some action with them, and Black Widow had a chance to show her fighting credentials, but that was about the sum of it. Which is a shame because I was expecting something more between her and Iron Man.

While Nick Fury was there to push The Avengers idea into the film, again his character was never really explored in any way. Not really a surprise in this film I suppose, but a shame.

For me the star of the show has to be Sam Rockwell. He is always fantastic in everything he does, and again here he is stealing the show. But the film doesn’t give him the chance to do much more than just be a pissed off CEO who likes to shout and resent Tony Stark. But his scene where he is showing off his weapons is great fun.

The biggest let down for me was Whiplash. The scenes where he is not fighting are OK, passable. But when it comes to action there is just not enough. Even though the film is long enough, and plenty of time is given to show the characters. Nothing much seems to happen. I didn’t feel like I saw much growth apart from a tiny moment with Tony Stark and his dad that I thought was very nicely done.

Conclusion

There is no denying this is a good film. It is great fun to watch and the effects will make you smile. But there was a lot that I think could have been trimmed or at least taken in a different direction.

Get your popcorn and settle in!

Don’t forget you need to stay right to the end of the film. Get right through the credits and there is a treat waiting for you!

"How may I be of service"

I have have had my reservations about the new doctor, taking over the role from David Tennant was always going to be a very hard job. But I have to admit I am liking the new doctor. He has the quirkiness and charm that is needed to pull it of, his companion is actually very good, and the first two stories have been good. I think the revised look works well, and while he is still finding his feet he carries it of so well I think I could happily watch a few series and be more than content.

That was until this weeks episode. Written by Mark “League of Gentlemen / Psychoville” Gatiss it was a look into an alternative World War II where our secret weapon was the Daleks. You can not tell me that is not a great idea for a plot. The opening was beautifully done and the reveal of a Dalek in WWII inspired uniform was excellent (I especially liked the little union jack on and the cammo packs), even the name “Ironside” was a great touch. The inclusion of Nazi Daleks would make for a fascinating story in its own right (or how about Nazi Cyber Men?).

Tommy Dalek/Nazi Cyber men

Unfortunately for me this episode took a tumble as soon as they stepped away from this simple premise and back into what I can only call a deus ex machina! For some reason Dr Who doesn’t think it can go on without the Dalek. But the problem is of course the Doctor is very good at totally wiping the Daleks from existence. So you get this trope of the few Daleks trying to resurrect the race from some random point in time.

As an enemy the Daleks are great and Dr Who definitely needs to keep them, but they don’t need to be in every series. We could happily go a couple of series and try out all new things and bring them back. That would be great! But not only did they need to bring them back again, they needed to update the look. For me the Daleks have had roughly the same look for a long time, and with the few exceptions (Davros, The tank Dalek from the McCoy days) it stays the same. It works well, its menacing, its everything you want. But it seems someone has decided they can do better.. and what they same up with as far as I am concerned is a joke.

All new look with a fatter ass. Available in a range of colours!

Its unfortunate because I like the new eye stalk, but everything else is all wrong. The shape now looks weird, its grown a huge ass, its got a massive head, and its too tall. But the voice work for excellent. The ark work here actually looks quiet nice, but somehow that has been lost in translation and on screen it does not work. On top of that the episode just didn’t make much sense as soon as the doctor set foot on their ship. But I did love the Tardis self destruct being a Jammy Dodger.. genus!.

SFX go strange

Then you get the bomb you can bomb you can talk out of blowing up, and spitfires in space (again sounds great.. didn’t work). What has happened to the FX? The ship and the spitfires had a much more “done with models” feel to them this time around. Being a huge fan of Thunderbirds, UFO, and even Blake’s 7 I can appreciate a nice retro SFX joke, but these didn’t work, it was either too cheap, or botched and just felt weak.

Unfortunate conclusion

I don’t know where this episode has gone wrong. I can only assume its when the marketing department came in and said they needed to launch a new line of toys. I was hoping for better from Moffat and Gatiss together! I am still enjoying the series, and a looking forward to the return of Moffat’s own angles next week (from one of my all time favorite episodes ‘Blink’).

Take a gander over to IO9 to see some more really great looking art for for the new series.

There is no doubt it would take a brave producer to pick up this film. It could go either way, and if it did go bad it would go very bad. Fortunatly this film does not go bad, it actually brings something new to the ‘Superhero’ genre that I really enjoyed.

This is a bleak film, and the middle is actually very hard to watch. It deals with how hard it would be to just be an average person who stands up and says they will not take it any more.

All about the characters

This is a film that is only about the characters. They have no special powers, they are all normal people who want to do something extra ordinary. Fortunatly the actors are all more then capable, and really bring out amazing performances.

Big Daddy (Nick Cage) and Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz) totally steal this film. Their chemistry is just fantastic to watch. They have the most heart felt moments in the film, and they make the key part of this film very hard to watch.

There are a lot of staples of the super-hero film in “Kick-Ass”, but almost all of them are turned on their head by the time you get to the end of them film. It is refreshing to see a film that is just brave in what it wants to say, not caring what people want to say about it. This is not a film for everyone, but for the ones who like it.. they will love it.

You know it is not going to be an ordinary film when one of the first things out of the 12 year old Hit girls lips is the c-word!

See it again

I am looking forward to picking this up on Blue-Ray, it will definitly reward multiple viewing, and I am very interested to know what they actors and the film makers have to say about what they have done.

Conclusion

See it, love it, see it again!

If there was one thing what annoying, it was the trailer for “Scott Pilgrim vs the world” before hand. That film just looks fantastic (have been a fan of Edgar Wright since the first episode of “Spaced”) and I have to see that when it comes out.

You have to agree just from the trailer it looks like it could be a lot of fun. I especially like the style they have used, and the actual animation is top notch. Head on over to Zombieinfo where they have an interview with the creators and some additional concept art that looks fantastic.

As of yet I have not found the official site, and IMDB seems to be behind the curve on this one. So keep your eyes peeled and I will put out more info as I find it.

I have also just realised I have hardly talked about zombies on here at all, what a crime against undead nature. I will have to see what I can dig up.

Out now is “Cloudy with a chance of meatballs”, the latest home release from Dreamworks Sony/Columbia. Their work keeps getting better and better, the last film (Monsters vs Aliens) is probably the best they have done. But there very best just does not compare to the standard set. Gaff-tastic: My fault! I even laughed out loud when they showed the classic Columbia title screen that has brought me so much joy over the years, should have remembered that.

Cloudy is a great film, we all laughed out loud at various bits. The voice acting is top notch, the story is a lot of fun, the animation is excellent. But somehow its missing something…

Characters are king

Dreamworks Everyone is very slowly learning what it is that makes Pixar the masters when it comes to animation. It is nothing to do with the technology used or how spectacular you make it look, it is all about the characters. You have to feel connected with them, then the audience will go anywhere you want them to go.

The first thing that struck me about the film are the actors they have managed to get to voice these characters. Casting Mr T is pure genius, he is a stand out character that is a lot of fun to watch, without having to reference “The A-Team”. I would love to see a film with just him. But the rest of the cast are just as good, and the addition of Bruce Campbell rounds it all out nicely.

Designed by test screening

The story is a little goofy, but you are willing to suspend your disbelief because it is just so much fun. Any story where it rains steaks is not going to be a serious drama, but there are some odd moments. You will be watching, laughing along quiet nicely and just enjoying the ride, then something just stupid happens and snaps you back to the idea they designed this film with test screenings and 10 year olds in mind.

I will give you an example. You are watching the two main characters having their heart to heart, it is all going well when the phone rings to break the moment. Classic story fare, nothing wrong with that. The guy, uncomfortable, says he has to answer it and breaks away… and walks straight out of a window. What? Why, just because there has not been a laugh for a minute and the test screening said the 10 year olds where getting bored. There is nothing wrong with doing stupid things, but there has to be a good reason for them otherwise you are just playing with the audience and that is no fun for the adults who are enjoying it.

Don’t get me wrong, I love abstract humour and this film has it in spades. Just these little jolts were a shame.

Conclusion

This is a great film, lots of fun for the whole family. Is it worth buying? Probably, it is worth seeing. There are some excellent scenes, and you will laugh a lot. By that measure alone it is great. But it does feel hollow, where as Pixar film will leave you with something to think about, this will leave you with nothing. There is nothing wrong with that, it is just a shame.

Get it, see it, enjoy it, and tide yourself over until “Up” is released next week.

What more can I say?

Announced this week is Bruce Campbell’s next film “Bruce vs Frankenstein”. This is going to be a follow on to the excellent “My name is Bruce” that came out last year.

All of us here at BGR are big fans of Bruce Campbell, from his early beginnings in “Evil Dead” all the way to his show stealing performances in the Spider-man films, he is always a joy to watch.

“My name is Bruce” really surprised me when I saw it. In many ways it felt a little unpolished and probably could have done with a little more work, but somehow that makes it more endearing. Bruce and the supporting cast are fun to watch. Ultimately Bruce carries the film (he also Directed it), wins the day, gets the girl, and slays the demon in a style only he could do.

I am looking forward to this when it is released some time next year.

If you are looking more Bruce Campbell action check out:

• Army of Darkness
• Bubba Ho-Tep
• The Evil Dead
• Evil Dead II

and a whole ton of other great films.  If you want to know more about the legend, check out his site

The new Dr Who logo. Not sure about it

So over Christmas David Tennant stepped down as the doctor, and marked the end of a remarkable period in the Dr Who series. Let me just say that David Tennant is responsible for everyone in my house loving Dr Who. From my wife to my children they all think it is a great show, and it is mostly down to him. Billy Piper and Catherine Tate have been stand out assistants who have has astounded me with their ability to take on the role and make more than just a side kick.

So it is unfortunate that David Tennant’s final show is also the weakest of all the episodes he has done.

How can you end it?

I suppose one of the real problems for the show has been how do you kill off the doctor. It has become so popular that no matter what you do you are not going to satisfy everyone. But it seemed to me I wanted something much more intimate from the final show than what we got. It is something Tennant can do and has done amazingly well and their was a brief flicker of it right before the end that made me smile. But as far as I was concerned the rest was a complete shambles.

John Simm is another talented actor, and while I thought he hammed The Master up a little more than he needed, he was still a convincing villain. But the villain turned psychotic was a step just a little too far, and one of many plot points that I didn’t think the episode needed.

This one was a story I just didn’t connect with in any way. Most of the others I have enjoyed and they have been surprisingly moving at times. Showing the frailty of the human condition with the death and destruction the doctor brings in his wake. Thought provoking at times, and even genuinely frightening in my favourite episode “Blink” . That one also stands out for me as a brave choice as the doctor is hardly in it at all and you seeing from another perspective.

Christmas Specials

For some reason the Christmas specials have never quiet worked. The format doesn’t seem to work well at the longer running time, and I always got the feeling the writers were trying to hard to make those stories bigger than they needed to be. The “Star Ship Titanic” episode (Douglas Adams reference in there for anyone who didn’t know) was a good story but didn’t hit the mark. The “Spider Queen” episode was fun but flat.

But I am not complaining, any Dr Who is better than no Dr Who. But they don’t need to make Christmas specials, Dr Who just doesn’t need it.

Long time fan

I have loved Dr Who for a long time. It seems to be becoming a theme of mine my obsession with British Sci-fi (maybe there is another blog in that). But there is nothing better than watching an entire story of Dr Who on a Sunday morning. That style of story telling is something I am surprised has not crept back into Dr Who. It used to be that a story was played out of about six episodes, so you had the first one where most things seemed normal. All the way through the middle as it became creepy, then the final pay off when the doctor normally saved the day. I enjoy this style because it slows the story and usually makes you engage your brain a little. While the current style is single story episodes, they work just fine. I do sometimes wish they would spend a little more time on some of them.

Who was your doctor?

My doctor (the one I can actually remember sitting down to watch was Silvester McCoy (1987 – 1989). I do remember a little of Colin Baker, and a little more Peter Davidson. But McCoy was the one when I was just the right age, and if I am honest I really like him as the doctor. He is a little hammy and whimsical, and his question mark umbrella is a little over the top. There are moments when this fades away and you are left with a much more sinister character, one of the key marks of the doctor.

McCoy always seems to be dismissed as the doctor, and that is a shame because not only was he fun to watch he also had the best companion. Ace (Sophie Aldred) the loud, rude, obnoxious and clever one who could easily keep pace with the scenes and developed her own character into something that was just as much fun to watch.

A wimper, not a bang!

So Tennant’s stint as the doctor ends not on the high note I would have liked, but well enough. Now is the time of the new doctor and I am afraid to say I don’t have much hope for him. Like all actors following the previous one it hard to see how they will take over. There will only be one way to find out and that is to see how he does in the new series starting in just a few months.

The day of the Triffids makes its return

Some time ago I wrote about one of my favourite Sci-Fi TV Series “Day of the Triffids“. Made in 1981, much like “Blakes 7” it is a little known British gem of a show that never really seemed to get the regard it should have got. Over Christmas the BBC have finally shown the new version. With some excellent actors, and a more grown up feel it is an excellent addition to the growing catalogue of remakes of this classic story.

I have to confess I have not read the book, and now I am starting to think I should. Every remake of this story has something new, while the core story still remains as chilling as ever.

What’s new?

Once you have remade the same story a few times can you really bring something new to it this time round? Simply put yes! I personally find this a very strong story. It probably appeals to my love of zombie films. You have a very simple enemy, who is slow moving, unintelligent foes who can do very little. But their power is in their unrelenting progress . With no fear and lack of respect for the human race you have an unstoppable enemy that create a very tense and claustrophobic atmosphere.

This version is very much like the older series. The stories are surprisingly close, but I much preferred this version explanation of the event that blinds the majority of the population. I also enjoyed the more detailed look at the triffid farming and the explanation of why the male and female plants are kept separated.

Which do you prefer?

If I am honest I prefer the 1981 version. Not because I think it is a better telling of the story, but just because they had more time to go into the ideas. While the initial story is very straight forward, the stories that evolve from it are far more interesting. While the new version touched on these emerging stories, and even created a new one with the nuns sacrificing their useless residents. It never had the time to really explore any of these.

There is a whole six part series just in the idea of a safe haven the where the Triffids show no interest in attacking. Once you know the secret it makes perfect sense and that reveal could have been much more dramatic and thought provoking. Is it so wrong to sacrifice a dying old man to save a fifty more? Where do you draw the line? What if you could save a thousand for someone who would die anyway, or was no longer interested in helping the whole? This is actually something I miss from Dr Who.

British Sci-Fi Rant

You have to love David Tennant as the doctor, in fact you have to love the doctor in general, it is an amazingly clever and simple idea for a show. It exemplifies something I love about British Sci-Fi and Horror in general. In US shows you know the core people are safe. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are safe, they are definitely coming back. McGyver will get into a tough spot, but he will find away out of it (even if you do steal the whole ending to “The Italian Job”.. you bastard!).

But British work is not so simple (at least it never used to be.. but that’s a different story). You are totally entitled to kill your main hero and all his friends if you like. You can never be sure who is safe. “Blakes 7” has to be the epitome of that, your main hero doesn’t even appear in the last two series to the point you are sure he is dead. Only to have him pop up right at the end, only to be killed by his friend Avon (you Bastard!). If this is a spoiler to you… grow up! You should already know this stuff, there is no excuse, it was made in 1981 for god sake!

Dr Who is the pinnacle of that idea, you have a character that you can kill off at any point. There is no guarantee he will be about to help. Yes you know he can come back, but each iteration is a little different so you do lose one character and gain another.

This was the feel I got from the the old Triffid series, any one of them could go at any point. That unpredictability makes the show watch-able. With no clear villan you are never really sure who you should looking out for. Yes the acting is not the greatest, but I love that. Dr Who would be nothing without Tom Baker hamming it up for all he’s worth.

Failing

So this was the failing I felt in the show, Torrance was just there you make you dislike him, he didn’t serve much purpose apart from that. So there was no really need to spend as much time as they did on him.

Because of all the time lost to making you hate him, we lost a lot to Triffid time. Towards the end they talk about the Triffids using the sewers and over running the city. But we didn’t get to see any of that, and that was a real shame. It would have given a chance for Izzard to really make you dislike Torrance as he sacrificed his own men so he could make his escape.

Again this is something I miss from current Sci-Fi, Dr Who is the biggest culprit of this. It used to be that a single story would take six episodes to play out. It would start of all nice with some strange happenings, until the really weird stuff would come out, then the doctor would step in and save the day. Fairly standard stuff, but at least there was time to play with the ideas and come up with something with a little meaning. Admittedly not all the stories deserved all this attention but some of the classics are better for it. This is where I think Triffids could have done with being a few episodes longer. Rather than being a film cut in half they should have gone for more shorter episodes. But that is just my personal opinion.

My conclusion

This new version was excellent, the visuals were good, and the acting was excellent. But something was lost. There was too much time spent on the run, and not enough time to see the tragedy unfold. It is worth seeing, and I especially liked the new design for the Triffids.

Check out some other peoples thoughts on the new show:

• Den of Geek – A great in depth look. Points out some things I had not even considered.
• Dan’s Media Digest – Also talks about the rushed nature of the new series. But overall a good show.
• BCS – I think this sums up my thoughts.. it was good, but doesn’t quiet hit the mark.

I see you

This film can really only be described as a master piece of film making that it seems only a few directors are able to pull off.

Lets not mince words here, Avatar is a brilliant film! There, it is said! This is an epic film in every way, from the grand story to the amazing vistas, right through to the stunning technology they have used to create this marvel. The majority of this film is computer generated but in such a life like and detailed way it is hard to see where the computer generation ends and the real people begin. I was very impressed with the similarity between the real actors and their avatars. It just leant a little more to the life like quality of the animation work.

This is a long film (3 hours) but not only does it not feel that long, there isn’t really any fluff that can be trimmed away. Every scene has something it needs to get across to you and where there was a chance to remove a scene it was taken. As a result the film is long but moves at a good pace all the way through. In fact there were a number of scenes where I wanted it to slow a little so I could take in the stunning backgrounds and the details of the world. This will be a very rewarding film to watch at home, not only will you get to hear James Cameron’s take on it, but you will get to really take in the details. I get the feeling the directors cut (if there is one) will be longer.

A lot has been made about this films eco ethics, to be honest I did not feel it. I can see why people would say it has an eco message to tell you, but I never felt it was rammed down my throat. It was more realistic than that. A planet has a mineral people want, they turn up and want to destroy the planet and its people because they don’t give a toss. Any corporation would do that, especially if that planet is six years into deep space.

Confession

I did not see this film in 3D, I wish I had. Even though it has been out for two weeks the 3D showing was completely full (I have never seen that before). There is a very good chance I will be going back just so I can see it in 3D. There are various parts of the film that will really reward you for it, and there was only one moment where I thought it was gratuitously used but you have to forgive every 3D film at least one cheap shot.

Conclusion

Go and see this film, it is as amazing as you have been lead to believe!

Sometimes they produce a true classic in their own right. Airplane for example is basically a remake of a 1957 film called “Zero Hour”. A fairly by-the-numbers air disaster film. But with a new look at it a truly hilarious comedy was created.

Then there are cases where the original is a great concept, but the film just does not do it justice. John Carpenter’s 1982 remake of “The Thing” took another obscure film and turned it into a horror classic (one I still have problems watching some scenes).

Every time something new should be brought. Either a new twist on the idea, or just improving it all around with a better director. But a film should never be remade just for the sake of it, and an all time classic definitely shouldn’t.That is the problem with the new trend in Hollywood. They seem intent on taking an already legendary film and remaking it just because it seems they think it will make just as much money again. But as all normal people know its not the film alone that makes it classic, its the combination of actors, director, and all the other parts that went into making it.

There is currently an extensive list of films already in the works that just should not be re-made. I’m sure there are many more being made, but these are the ones that stand out to me as the worst offenders.

The Birds

Alfred Hitchcock re-made by Michael Bay
If you can, you need to see the original. The basic premise is simple, birds start attacking people. A simple and quiet comical idea, but when filmed by Hitchcock even the most simple idea takes on new meaning.

Then we have Mr Bay. The man who have managed to make two Transformers films that don’t actually seem to contain the title character. He has made some great films “The Rock” and “Bad Boys” are both fun to watch. But I think he has over extended when he starts comparing himself with Alfred Hitchcock.

Akira & Ghost in the Shell

Is nothing safe? I have already talked plenty about Ghost in the Shell and what it means. If there is one more film that is more important to anime and science fiction its Akira. This is the film that is responsible for my love of anime.

So lets think for a moment..how can we improve this film? Lets move it from Neo-Jepan to Neo-New York (eh?). DiCaprio will take on Kenada(oh dear!).. only a little older (what?) the the rest of the film stay pretty much unchanged, but in live action (whats the point?).

Dreamworks have picked up Ghost in the Shell. There seem to be little details about it at the moment so we will have to see. But I don’t hold out any hope at all than a live action version can be anything less than terrible. Dreamworks will put a good budget to it, and I’m sure the effects will be great. But they will not get the hard concept at the centre of it because they will be driven by audience reactions and most people won’t be able to handle it.

Nightmare on Elm Street

If you have ever looked through Wes Craven’s back catalog its amazing to me that he made it to make films like “Nightmare on Elm Street”, or “Scream”. Some of his earlier work is hard to watch. I have never understood why “The hills have eyes” is classed as a classic, everyone has their own taste and I can only assume they can see something in it I can not.

That was remade in 2006 and I think is a good candidate to have it done. An interesting idea that can be improved. Its just a shame I don’t enjoy either version.

But “Nightmare on Elm Street” is entirely different film. The original is a horror classic. Stupid in places, horrific in others it is a product of its time and still stands up well. Sporning 5 sequels and a number of spin-offs it has something special.

So there is just no need to remake it, nothing much can be added to it. From what I can tell from the trailer it seems to be a straight up remake of the original film with some parts from the other films. Of all the remakes coming it definitely looks interesting. But I think that says more about Craven’s original idea than it does about this new version.

Fin

There are a number of other remakes on the way. Including the remake of “The Lavender Hill Mob” that made me write this post. The original version is a classic Ealing Comedy. It is a joy to watch, so what possibly can be added to it?

Like the other British films that have been recently remade like “The Ladykillers” or “School for scoundrels” a competent film will be made that compleatly misses the point of the original. But I do enjoy the “Ladykillers” remake.. except of Marlon Wayanes swearing his way through it.

Remake a film becuase you can add something to it. Not just because you think you can.