The Vow

The basics 

The Vow is an American film which came out in 2012. Michael Sucsy directed this film which was based on the true life story and book, The Vow by Kim and Krickitt Carpenter. This film is a drama/romance with a bit of comedy and it is about love, memory loss and moments that can change you’re live.

What is this film about?

A newlywed couple unfortunately gets in to a serious accident as there car is hit from behind by a truck. The husband, Leo, receives a few minor injuries but nothing to serious. His wife, Paige, on the other hand ends up in a coma. When she wakes she doesn’t recognise Leo and we discover that she has lost a few year of her memory and now Leo has work to win back the heart off his own wife.

My views on it

The first problem I have with this film was there before I even sat down to watch it. Just from watching the ad of it on TV, I found out what this film was about and that it was based on a true story. Due to this I already knew how this film was going to pan out and how it was going to end and I was right. This film is heavily predictable and even when you are watching it you can see every twist that is going to happen plenty of time before it dose. But I can’t keep on about this; due to the nature of the film it was always going to be this way. So this problem isn’t something that we could find someone to point a finger at and say this is your fault, it was inevitable, still annoying though.

It doesn’t take too long before you realise that this film is set in modern day, mainly because Paige asks who the president is? And Leo says Barack Obama. Because of this it is easy to see that this film is set in a different time from the real event (which happens in 1993 just so you know). Due to this I start to think about how much of this film is actually based on the true story? And because of this I could no longer really trust the film, all the time thinking did that actually happen? Does he really do that? And doe that person even exist? The key selling point about this film is that it was meant to have happened and from watching it you can’t trust what did happen and what didn’t, beside the basic facts. After about five minutes on Google I found out that the film is a lot more fabricated then I originally guessed. So it just goes to show that it is based on a true story but very loosely and for me this film loses a lot of its integrity because of this.

My last problem with this film is that it is very forgettable (and yes I see the irony in saying that). After leaving the cinema I tried to think of the main characters names and I could not remember any of them. So what I am trying to say this film does not make an impact on you, it doesn’t leave you thinking or even make for lasting conversation. So don’t expect this film to stick with you for long after you have watched it.

I have ripped in to this film a lot in this review but I have to say it isn’t that bad. The acting is good, it kept my interest all the way through and I did have a good laugh a few times as well. So if you’re one of those film geeks that looks a bit too much in to things (like me) then best give this one a miss but for anyone else it’s a pleasant little film with some humour and I would say why not, give it a watch.

Favourite Quote 

Leo: Life's all about moments, of impact and how they changes our lives forever. But what if one day you could no longer remember any of them?

Rating 2/5

Capitalism: A Love Story

The basics 

Capitalism: A Love Story is an American documentary which was made in 2009. It is the latest in a long line of documentaries made by one of America's best-known and most controversial documentarians Michael Moore. This film is about Capitalism, America, greed, corruption, corporations and the effect they have had on the everyday lives of Americans.

What is this film about?

In this film we follow Michael Moore as he talks to the Americans that have suffered the negative effects of capitalism. We get to see people who have unfairly lost their jobs, people being evicted from their homes and people who are worth more to their company’s dead than alive. He also goes to find out why this is happening by delving in to America’s modern history, by heading up to the political steps of Washington and to the financial hub of America, Wall Street.

My views on it

On the twenty year anniversary of Michael Moore’s first film, Roger & Me (1989), he is back with another documentary that likes to, yet again; take a few good old digs at the country he calls home.

Just so I can get this out of the way early on, I must say I did enjoy watching this film. It was really well put together, it had some good humour in places, I do enjoy Michael Moore’s hybrid style of documentary making between expository and performative, I learnt a few things and I am glad to have it as part of my DVD collection. But that’s doesn’t mean that this film is perfect, no not at all. I do admit when I was watching this film it was great. It held my interest, got me a bit angry at the things the film wanted me to get angry at and all in all I had a good time. It was only after watching this film when I started to mull it over in my head that I started to pick up on a few issues I had with it.

One of my issue I had with it was the irony of the film itself. This film is all about flinging mug at capitalism and how it has ruined the lives of so many Americans but by creating a film about this issue, Michael Moore himself has made a lot of money from it. Michael Moore’s current net worth is said to be about fifty million, so this goes to show that for somebody who hates capitalism, he is bloody good at it.

Another issue is that the film is 99% based around American capitalism, with only two very small mentions about Japan and German at the start and the end of the film. Now before I watch this film I knew it was going to be mainly about America but with a title like ‘Capitalism: A Love Story’ I was a little disappointed that it only focused on America. Capitalism is an economic system which is used throughout most of the world, here is a short list of some countries that uses capitalism as well

Canada
Mexico
Ireland
UK
France
Portugal
Spain
Belgium
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Italy
Sweden
Finland
Denmark
Cyprus
Austria
Czech Republic
Poland
Slovenia
Romania
Bulgaria
Greece
Australia
India
New Zealand

And many, many more. So by this almost denial to recognise that America is not the only place in the world with capitalism, the film becomes more about America then capitalism itself.  So for me the film dose lose some of its integrity because of this.

In his line of work I would not say it is his best but it is still a good film. As a piece of documentary film making I would not class this as a must see but I would say I don’t think you will be disappoint with this film either. Michael Moore is a quality film maker and this is evident in this movie, as it is in most of his films. All in all this film comes down to one simple question, do you like Michael Moore films? If yes you will love it if no you may have to give it a miss and if you haven’t see one before I would say watch Bowling for Columbine.

Favourite Quote 

Michael Moore:  ‘I refuse to live in a country like this, and I'm not leaving.’

Rating 3.5/5

Sharktopus

The basics 

Sharktopus is an American movie with came out in 2010 and was a made for TV film by the Syfy channel. Sharktopus is a horror, science fiction, monster movie which is mostly set Puerto Vallarta in Mexico. The film was directed by Declan O'Brien, written by Mike MacLean and stars Eric Roberts. This film is about sea, sun, military genetic engineering, a father and daughter relationship and wonderfully bad CGI.  

What is this film about?

The film starts off with a pretty good montage of Santa Monica, California and then we get introduced to two random blond beach babes (aka BBB) as they discuss the important issues at hand, to swim or to text? One of the BBB’s decides to go for a swim where the other doses not due to her profound augment ‘in the ocean, there’s fish out there’. As one of the BBB’s is taking a dip, a shark (and yes just a shark at the moment) starts to take an interest in her. Soon she is swimming for her life, until big jaws, I mean sharktopus grabs the shark and her life is saved.

After this we find out that sharktopus is a military project called ‘S 11’ and was created by a group called Blue Water. It was made as the navy’s next super weapon. In an attempt to impress a Commander they send S 11 to try and stay close to a civilian boat but not to harm it. As you would expect it goes wrong. The boat propellers damages the device with controls it and due to this S 11 is now free to do whatever it wants, and S 11 wants to kill. Now Blue Water has to hunt down this super weapon which is 50% shark, 50% octopus and 100% deadly.  

My views on it

In the wonderful world of B movies, they have brought us some amazing things of the years. Such as a 50 foot woman, a giant blobs, aliens that snatch are bodies and in 2010 a half shark, half octopus creature.

In 2009 there was a B movie which was called Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus. Due to its popularity it was not long before people wanted to jump on the band wagon and capitalise and this new found fame for sharks and octopuses. So the good people at the syfy Channel got there foot in the door and created this film which only need half of the CGI budget. When I first heard about this film I was not expecting anything more than a good giggle, some amazingly bad CGI and a bazar creature. I must say it brought all that and more. Now I am not saying this is a great film but for what it is, I loved it

When it comes to bad, B movie horrors, this film, for me tick all the boxes. It only takes 3 minutes and 25 seconds until you get to see sharktopus, so right from the start there is action and an awesome sea monster. With a film like this, which only survives on action and an awesome sea monster it is good to get it in early before the audience start to pay any attention to the plot hole in the story line or the bad writing. Also with this film there is great sense of honesty with it. There is a whole scene in which they basically says that this a bad film and I loved that. In this scene, two random characters have heard a report about sharktopus and class it as a hoax, in which they joke it could be somebody making a film. One of the characters says they would watch it and the other ridicules them by saying ‘that’s because you’re easily amused. I’ve seen you mesmerised watching a frozen burrito rotate in the microwave oven’. So for me it seems like the people who created this are saying ‘we know this film is bad and it was rushed and we are sorry, but look there’s a shark with tentacles what can walk on land, isn’t that awesome’. And because of this I can forgive it flaws and its mistakes and I can just enjoy the film.

In this film there are a few gems which I did expect as well. A few of the death scenes are done well and made me laugh. I found Eric Robert performance to be good, the directing and editing was alright and you can tell he had fun with it, like split screen styles of framing they used every now and then.      

All in all if you are looking for a fun B movie horror this is your film, if you like low budget monster movies this is your film or if you need something to headline your next bad movie night then Sharktopus is your film.   

Favourite Quote 

Captain Jack: ‘I repeat sharktopus wants our virgins.’

Rating 3/5

Forged

The basics   

Forged is an American film which was made in 2010. Forged is an action, drama which was filmed and set (well it never says in the film that it is set here but it never did not say as well) in Scranton, Pennsylvania. The film was directed by William Wedig and he also writes the film with the star of it Manny Perez. This film is about unattainable forgiveness, fatherhood and revenge.  

What is this film about?

The film starts with are protagonist, Chuco getting out of prison, as he has just done eight and a half year for the manslaughter of his wife. As soon as he is out of the walls, he is picked up by his old gang and taken back in to their arms. They treat him with a display of a man being beaten and then shot to test his loyalty and because he pass’s, he then gets booze and pretty girl to shag in the stalls of a bar’s toilets. Then he is given is first assignment, to drive some car to some place. Little did he know that it was a drug drop off. With 50 grand in his pocket from the deal and being pissed at his gang for sending him on a job, when he has just got out of prison and only one strike away from being in there for life. He decides not to go back start away but to go get some apple pie. By an off chance his homeless teenage son walks in, who witnessed the murder of his mother and mutters the words ‘You killed my mother. Now I kill you.’        

My views on it

When I got ask to review this film I was thinking ‘Great an indie, low budget, American film. That’s right up my street.’ Boy was I wrong. When it comes to the idea of independent cinema, I must admit I do look at it with rose tinted glasses. There is a small part of me that automatically thinks that because it is not a mainstream and not made for the masses that it is already going to be good. But it’s nice to have a reality check now and then (and by that I mean this film) to remind me that independent cinema can me just awful as well.

In this film there seems to be a lot of plot hole, things that just don’t sense and just lazy or bad writing. For example, in this film the main character is Latino. Now like a normal person I was thinking there must be a reason why the main character is Latino if they have set the film in Pennsylvania, where there population is only just over 5 present Latino or Hispanic (yes I researched that). And the answer is no. there is no reason at all in the film why this character is Latino. They don’t even reference the fact that he is Latino as well. All they did is at they gave him a Latino name and that’s it. The main character might as well been from Kazakhstan and called Eugene for how much it matter to the film.

The film is meant to be about Chuco redeeming himself and making this bond with his son. But from the start you see him watch a man die, get drunk, shag a random women in a bar’s toilets and rob 50 grand of his gang which he made in a drug drop off. And the only reason he try’s anything with his son because he seems to have money at the time and because he bumped in to him in a restaurant. So because of this I don’t like Chuco and his actions don’t seem that genuine and this makes a flaw in the whole concept of the film. So it’s not really an ex-thug and his son, finding a way to forget the past and trying forge a relationship together. Its more still a thug and his gay for pay, homeless son being together because the father feels guilty and the son goes with him because he has money and wants him dead.  

And there many more reason why this film is bad …..

·         Terrible dialog

·         Really bad and very simplistic editing.  This is what happens when you let the director edit the film as well.

·        And beside one or two of the actors the rest of the performances were very poor.

So all in all I would not recommend this film. On paper the concept seems thought-provoking and deep, it’s just a shame that this film is riddled flaws and bad writing which ruin it.  

Favourite Quote 

Guy (Actor Dan Teachout): Why do you think they let him out so early? He cut a deal.

Rating 1/5

The Kid with a Bike (ordinal title: Le Gamin au vélo)

The basics   

‘The Kid with a Bike’ is a Belgium film that came out in 2011. It is a realistic drama that is set in Seraing, Belgium. (French spoken part of Belgium) and was written and directed by the Dardenne brothers (Jean-Pierre and Luc). This film is about rejection, parental figures, choices in life and the paths that we take when we make them.

What is this film about?

The film starts with the main character, Cyril a boy of only 11, repeatedly try to call his father’s on the phone from the children’s home where he is only meant to be staying temporary.  Everyone there is trying to explain to him that his father has left but in disbelief of this, he plans on escaping and running back to his father’s old apartment to see him and to get his bike. After a few attempts he manages to escape and get to his father’s old apartment block. As the children’s home workers find Cyril, and try to take him back, in his last attempt to stay there he holds on to a random woman with all he’s got, but eventually they break him free from her. To prove to Cyril the horrible truth they let him take a look around at his father’s apartment, only to find it empty.  

Later on back at the children’s home, Cyril gets a visitor and it’s the lady (Samantha) that he held in the apartments. She has come to drop something off for him, his bike which she brought off somebody who claims he brought it from Cyril’s dad. Still in disbelief that his father is would do something like that he presumes that it must have been stolen. Due to this act of kindness Cyril asks Samantha if he can stay with her on weekends and she says yes.  

My views on it

In all parts of this film (story, characters, editing etc.) there is something I like to call a beautiful roughness to it which makes the experience of this film feel more real and because of this it connects with the audience on a deeper level. For example the reason why Samantha fosters Cyril on the weekends is not explained. In most films this motivation would have been explained because they would want something to justify it, they would want A, to clarify B, so that everything is explained, Luc Dardenne comments on this in an interview ‘We were adamant that the audience would never find out why Samantha is drawn to Cyril. […] We didn’t want the past to explain the present.’.  So there are things in this film that are not explained, the editing is not really seamless, the camera is a bit shaky, but this creates that beautiful roughness. Due to this beautiful roughness it goes against most cinema norms (mainly Hollywood) and it almost stops feeling like you are watching a film and it becomes more of a gate way into these people’s lives. When you start viewing it like that the characters become more real to you and you can really connect with them. Because of this connection you have with the characters and the highs and lows they go through, this makes a film that really pulls at you heartstrings and for a drama that’s a good thing.

The acting in this film I must say is amazing. Cécile De France who plays Samantha is perfect for the roll and pulls it off ‘to the tee’ but the star of the film has to be Thomas Doret who plays Cyril. His acting quality surpasses his years and his portrayal of a kid going through this situation could not have been done better. It almost seems like the Dardenne brothers found a kid going through this and just put a camera in front of him without him noticing.  

I would recommend this film as it is moving, powerful and an emotional roller-coaster where you do not just watch it, you experience it. You can definitely see why this won Grand Prize of the Jury at Cannes.    

Favourite Quote 

Guy Catoul (Cyril’s father): ‘Don’t try to see me again’

Rating 4/5 stars  

Midnight in Paris

The basics   

Midnight in Paris is an American film which came out in 2011. It is a romantic comedy which is set in Paris and was written and directed by Woody Allen. This film is about romance, art, writing, wanting to be born in a different time, Paris, and time travel.

What is this film about?

This film starts off with a wonderful montage of all the iconic places in Paris. In this montage we see Paris in the sun, the rain and at night and this set up one of the main questions of the film to the audience, what setting do you think Paris is at its most beautiful?

We get introduce to are protagonist (Gil) as he proclaims his love for this city and his wish to have been in Paris in the 1920’s with all the famous writers, artist and to be in the rain. Gil is an American who has spent his literature career writing for Hollywood movies but now wants to see if he is good enough to write his first novel. On a trip to Paris with his fiancée (Inez) and her parents, one night after some wine tasting Inez goes dancing with some of her friends and Gil takes a night walk around Paris to clear his head. After getting lost and sitting on some steps a bell chimes that it is midnight and Gil is picked up by an old fashioned car by people dressed from the 1920’s.

My views on it

American comedy at the moment seems to fall in to only three categories crude humour like ‘The Hangover 1 and 2’ , randomness like ‘Family Guy’ or popular culture references like ‘South Park’. So when I watched this film it was great to see humour that did not have to be crude, random or just a references to be funny. There are references in this film but it’s all to 1920’s artist and writers, not just whatever just happened in the news. So Culture references are used, so you can say that this element of modern American comedy is presented but since they are mainly used when the film is set in 1920’s Paris you are not really able to class this as being popular. The comedy in this film is very witty, subtle and clever and for a film that came out in 2011 this is very refreshing to see.

Two of the main things I like about this film are how clever and charming it is. For example Gil finds himself talking to Salvador Dalí, Man Ray and Luis Buñuel in a bar and he starts to talk about how he is from the future. They just seem to think its normal and Gil reply’s ‘Yes, but you're a surrealist! I'm a normal guy!’. Jokes like that make this film so clever and if you understand them they are really funny but if not, the film is so charming that it can get away with. I must say I know a bit about artist’s and writer’s in the 1920’s so I did get most of it, but there where a good few things that went over my head but I did not mine at all. If you look at the character Paul, he talks about art and history and he get it wrong every now and then. For me this reflects that we are not meant to know about everything we see in this film as it does not punish us for not knowing. Besides as you watch you start to learn more about this time and the artist anyways.

One of the most surprise things I enjoyed about this film is actually Owen Wilson for his acting. For the role of Gil I think that Owen Wilson was the perfect cast, as they needed a charming, classic romantic almost cliché American writer and he is great at this role.

Favourite Quote 

Ernest Hemingway: If it's bad, I'll hate it. If it's good, then I'll be envious and hate it even more. You don't want the opinion of another writer.

Rating 4/5 stars  

Contagion

The basics   

Contagion is an American film that came out in 2011. It was directed by Steven Soderbergh and written by Scott Z. Burns and came with a star studded cast including Matt Damon, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow and more. This film is about outbreaks, fear, people’s lives, journalism and people just not washing their hands.

What is this film about?

The film starts on day two of the outbreak as we see Beth Emhoff, a business woman on a layover at Chicago airport as she has just came from Hong Kong and going to Minnesota. She seems to have flu like symptoms as she talks to her Chicago lover on her Phone as she waits for her flight. Next we get a slightly patronising montage scene with good long close ups of ill people all across the world touching things just so we know as an audience member that ill people still touch things and this is how a disease maybe spread.

After this we go to Minnesota and we see the disease spread as Beth’s son (Clark) gets pull out of school for being a bit ill like his mum. Then the family takes a turn for the worst as Beth start to have seizure and when she gets to the hospital she unfortunately dies, even though you would not be able to tell this by her husband’s (Mitch) reaction. It seems more like he just got told his car had been clamped not that his wife died. After this Mitch’s step son (Clark) dies and yet again Mitch’s reaction seems off, as he is a bit angry, but more like he just dropped his laptop, not that his step son just died. From here the infection spreads.

My views on it

Well at the start, besides some bad acting and being a bit patronising it had a lot of promise. The almost documentary style of filming was interesting and engaging at first as we follow people lives and how the disease spread. Also with the main protagonist (Beth) at the start of the film dying as well as her son it showed that this film was willing to be edgy and taboo. Sadly after this the film stops being good.

Due to the style of which the film was made (editing, cinamtography, ect), it started to grate on me after a while, it seemed like it did not know what it wanted to be. Part of it wanted to be a normal film and the other half wanted to be a documentary and this gets really annoying as the film drags on. As they tried to integrate these styles it did not seem to work. An example of this is when they are looking through some CCTV footage at a casino, they portray that they can see only what the cameras see, but the footage we see is a stylized version; as we see it like we are there in the casino and not the cameras on the celling. They should have just shown us the CCTV footage as it would have been and not make a stylized version of it for us; as that breaks the reality that the documentary style try’s to create.

After the beginning, the level of interest that this film sets up starts to decreases very quickly. This is because nothing interesting really happens and nothing is made to be dramatic. The pace of the film becomes very slow and as nothing is made to look really dramatic and it becomes monotone, just riding along on the same level of just ‘kind of interesting’. And that is what the film just become, just kind of interesting. Because it sticks to this one level for the rest of the film its gets really dull and it drags out. The film is only 1 hour and 46 minutes but it felt about 2 hours and a half. Even my friend John said after the film ‘that film was long, over 2 hours’.

As I am getting over my limit in the review I am just going to list a few over issues that I did not like, quickly for you.

*The film jumped from character to character all the time so you could not make a connection with them really.

*Acting was bad

*The disease itself was dull

*No twist

*The Ending was insulting and not needed

Favourite Quote 

Alan Krumwiede: It's a bad day to be a rhesus monkey.

Rating 1.5/5 stars