The long-awaited addition to the Narnia series has produced its first trailer. Like the other productions, there is plenty of striking images. Like the other productions, this one seems to have the same stilted presentation.

I enjoyed The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and thought Prince Caspian was lacking. My gut is telling me this is more like the latter than the former. I hope to be surprised.








Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: Ben Barnes, Bill Nighy, film, Liam Neeson, movie trailer

There is an old saying that "good things come in three's". The person who coined that phrase didn't live long enough to witness this cinematic trio of tripe.

But hey, at least these vampires don't sparkle like a bunch of mincing fairies.

This is like the others in the series: schlocky and overwrought. If you enjoy watching very good actors taking their material far too seriously and screaming nearly every line - knock yourself out. If you have better things to do than watch something as sophomoric as vampires fighting werewolves while taking off their clothes and rolling around in the moonlight and then chopping an untold number of people in half - then do those things.



Related Reviews:
Michael Sheen movies
Frost/Nixon (2008)
Underworld (2003)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
ReelTalk
The Movie Report

Labels: Bill Nighy, film, Michael Sheen, movie review, Rhona Mitra, sequel, vampire

I did not have high hopes for this one. Tom Cruise starring in a film about the failed assassination of Adolf Hitler? We already know how it ends and Cruise hasn’t shown his ability to act in nearly a decade. Luckily, the production was helmed by Bryan Singer and co-written by his The Usual Suspects partner Christopher McQuarrie along with Nathan Alexander. This production makes it clear that Singer and McQuarrie need to work together more often.

Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg (Cruise) is literally torn to pieces following an attack in Nazi occupied Africa. He comes to admit that Germany has been duped and the Fuhrer is leading them to destruction.

Stauffenberg is a German solider and he loves his country. To protect his homeland he decides the only answer is to assassinate Adolf Hitler. In this goal he finds many willing conspirators looking to do their part. As history tells us, they fail. Hitler survives the attempt and all the men are executed.

Despite the history, the film is surprisingly suspenseful. Singer managed to get me to hope the conspirators would succeed in their plot. Smartly, Singer and crew focused less on the conspiracy itself at the beginning and built up the personalities involved. This allows the audience to invest themselves in the doomed men. The men are presented not as Nazi stereotypes but for what they were, real men caught up in an impossible situation. Their leaders weren’t what they seemed and were an existential threat to everything they knew.

It should also be noted that Singer avoids delving into the worldviews of the Nazis, the concepts that they were fighting for. Its easier to create a sympathetic character if you avoid all of that Jew-hating, racist rhetoric he believes.

I’ve never been a huge fan of Cruise. This is primarily because I don’t find his films to be worth watching. He is a good actor when prompted and this film shows his ability. He’s a good and inviting lead who carries a bulk of the production. I would say this is his best performance in years, but that should go without saying. When he hasn’t been starring in Spielberg’s self-indulgent failures, he has been gritting his teeth in those tedious Mission Impossible movies. This is his best performance in years because this is his first film in years that called for a good performance.

Those who love historical and/or war movies will most likely enjoy this film. It is intelligently crafted while still being a Hollywood-safe version of history. It has enough conventional film making to have audiences entertained while having enough thought behind it to make it something more than just a waste of time.




Related Reviews:
World War II movies
The Hiding Place (1975)
Mephisto (1981)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Roger Ebert
The Screening Log

Labels: Bill Nighy, film, Kenneth Branagh, movie review, Terrance Stamp, Tom Cruise, Tom Wilkinson

Screenwriters: David P.I. James, Cormac Wibberley (National Treasure) and Marianne Wibberley (National Treasure: Book of Secrets)
Director: Hoyt Yeatman
Actors: Nicholas Cage (Raising Arizona), Penelope Cruz (Vanilla Sky), Bill Nighy (Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End), Steve Buscemi (Reservoir Dogs) and Will Arnett (Blades of Glory)

Labels: Bill Nighy, film, movie trailer, Nicholas Cage, Penélope Cruz, Steve Buscemi, Will Arnett

And Kenneth Branagh in the role of Dean Vernon Wormer...

Uptight Square Underling: "Sir, unwashed hippies are running a pirate radio station in international waters."
Dean Vernon Wormer: "They are? Well, as of this moment, they're on DOUBLE SECRET PROBATION! "









Screenwriter: Richard Curtis (Bridget Jones' Diary)
Director: Richard Curtis
Actors: Gemma Arterton (Quantum of Solace), Philip Seymour Hoffman (Before the Devil Knows You're Dead), Bill Nighy (Underworld), Emma Thompson (Wit), Kenneth Branagh (Conspiracy) and Nick Frost (Hot Fuzz)

Labels: Bill Nighy, Emma Thompson, film, Gemma Arterton, Kenneth Branagh, movie trailer, Nick Frost, Philip Seymour Hoffman

So, how much money do they have to pay to the Big Boy Restaurant chain for lifting their look?*
A boy who's built for adventure...and an all-you-cat-eat breakfast and fruit bar.


Screenwriters: Timothy Harris (Space Jam)
Director: David Bowers (Flushed Away)
Actors: Freddie Highmore (The Golden Compass), Kristen Bell (Heroes), Bill Nighy (Underworld), Nicholas Cage (Ghost Rider) and Donald Sutherland (An American Haunting)

Labels: Bill Nighy, film, Freddie Highmore, Kristen Bell, movie trailer, Nicholas Cage

Y'know, for a movie about vampires and we. rewolves, they're taking themselves a little too seriously.

To be honest, the first Underworld movie was a good piece of thoughtless, filler (Spike TV has to get their weekend programming from someplace). The second one at least had some good design work. This one? Well, something stinks and I don't think its all the undead guys running around.





Screenwriters: Danny McBride (Underworld), Dirk Blackm(an (Outlander) and Howard McCain (Outlander)
Director: Patrick Tatopoulos
Actors: Rhona Mitra (Doomsday), Michael Sheen (The Queen), Bill Nighy (Underworld: Evolution) and Shane Brolly (Room 6)

Labels: Bill Nighy, Rhona Mitra, sequel, vampire

Filmmakers Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright pay homage to all of the stupid action movies they’ve ever seen. Much like what they had done with their ode to zombie movies with Shaun of the Dead, the intent of this work is to stand on the shoulders of the slouching giants that came before them.

Pegg portrays Sergeant Nicholas Angel, a tightly wound cop who is exiled to a small village when his colleagues in London find his excessive police talents too much to compete against. While in the village the ever diligent Angel teams up with a bloated cop named Danny Butterman. The two uncover a village wide murderous conspiracy. This simple fish out of water story is fun to watch and is handled, for the most part, expertly by Pegg and Wright.

There isn’t a grand scheme at work here. The underachieving point of the film is to simply give a nod to other underachieving films (the Keanu Reeves embarrassing action flick Point Break is given prominence). This film manages to do this easily. They offer affection towards stupid action movies while providing one at the same time.

This is a goofy movie but it has the sense to not take itself too seriously. This may seem like a small deal, it isn’t. In a day and age where Quintin Tarantino is considered to be a visionary, its nice to see some post-modernists who know their disposable culture isn’t critical.

Worldview: This film concentrates on the notions of duty and purpose. Sergeant Angel is so committed to his work that he fails to live a life. Conversely, his partner Butterman is such a slouch that he fails to be useful. The two transition away from their faulty behavior (Angel loosens up while Butterman becomes a real cop) as the film pushes forward. The trajectories of the characters aren’t anything new and are rather tedious. However, it should be noted that the film does support some morality that makes sense.

There is also a strong strain of through against being too prideful. I can’t really get into it without ruining the film so I’ll be a little ambiguous. Suffice to say that being overly concerned with rewards can lead to a downfall. This is clearly expressed in this production.


Production Notes: Where the film runs into a spot of concern is in its creation. What we have here is postmodern filmmakers offering homage to the works they’ve enjoyed in the past. This isn’t that big of a deal and it’s not a deal breaker in regards to seeing this film.

What we see here with Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright, considering their previous work, is a couple of men raised on Hollywood McMovies. While their ode to action movies is tongue-in-cheek and not really meant to honor the other works. They know that films such as Point Break and Bad Boys are horrid movies but they also know they are enjoyable and have had an impact on international society. This is where they part ways with their contemporary postmodernists Quintin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez who take the putrid drainage that flows from world cinema as being worthy of praise. Tarantino in particular has made a living from reviving disposable culture and treating it like it is high art. Pegg and Wright also perform this task but do so to lovingly mock the low quality fluff that the entertainment industry has been pumping out for forty years. There no pretense that what they’re up to has any value. At least they should get credit for knowing what they’re doing.


Cautions: This is an action film so there’s plenty of violence. The actual action sequences aren’t too heavy however. There’s little blood or gore in these sequences just comical tongue-in-cheek violence. Oddly though the aftermath of the murders which leads to the action sequences is where the film reserves all of its most adult content. Be warned, the murder victims are shown being stabbed, decapitated, burned and crushed. There’s absolutely no reason for the filmmakers to show this content but they do. Their lack of control is unfortunate since the remainder of the film is remarkably tame in regards to the presentation of violence.

I also need to note that there is a load of cursing. There's more swear words here than after Sean Penn stubs his toe.


Other Reviews:
Nehring the Edge
Cinema de Merde
Film-Forward Reviews


Another Simon Pegg Movie:
Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Labels: Bill Nighy, comedy, cops, film, movie review, Nick Frost, Simon Pegg

This final installment of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise left me more disappointed than a beer vendor at a Baptist convention. Even if you liked the first two Pirates of the Caribbean movies, this one will still probably let you down.

Johnny Depp reprises his role as Captain Jack Sparrow and fills the screen once again with his performance. The problem is that even a wildly popular character cannot mask a thin script. Numerous loose ends from their previous film Dead Man’s Chest proves too much to for screenwriters Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot to overcome. To force a resolution to their sprawling narrative, the writers introduce new characters, conflicts and rules that are simply inorganic when held against the previous films. By the end of this outing it is clear that it is a good thing the franchise is going away.

This film is proof that it is possible to have too many spokes in your narrative wheel. It’s a bad thing when your audience needs a scorecard to keep track of all of the competing plots and characters.

Go back and watch the original Pirates of the Caribbean and ignore this fumbling mess.


Worldview: Just like the previous film this movie promotes a view that moral relativity rules the universe. The original film’s line of thought that the pirate’s code is more of a set of suggestions fuels this piece. Everyone is out for themselves, while there are brief moments of sacrifice, any semblance of actual goodness is vacant. When one looks at the behavior of the “good guys” they are not far removed from the villains. The only thing that makes the protagonists good is that our attention is pushed their way. In the world of this film there are no good people.

In the world of this film there is also no God. There are plenty of curses and odd afterlife notions but God is not present. Instead of being rescued from the price of their sins by the blood of Christ, this film shows that their pals can save people – if their pals really try hard. I always find it interesting that filmmakers are likely to casually mention sin, curses and the devil but can’t quite muster the logic to speak of Christ standing against these things.



The characters are the same throughout the films but the story is too transitory to maintain any sense.


Cautions: This film contains cartoon violence, but it is dark. The violence isn’t gory but the nonchalant attitude towards killing may be disturbing. There is a brief moment of sensuality between two characters involving the male lead passionately kissing at the leg of the female lead.

As with the previous films, the biggest concern with this work is the godless worldview which allows for the casual violence and whatnot. The afterlife is considered to be a pliable plane of existence that can be manipulated and molded by human endeavor. Since this is the case one’s morality in this world isn’t of concern. You can always have your punishment absolved if you’re well connected and people will come to your aid.


Other Reviews:
Reel.com
Film School Rejects


Kiera Knightly movies:
Bend it Like Becham (2002)
Domino (2005)

Labels: Bill Nighy, film, Johnny Depp, Kiera Knightly, movie review, Orlando Bloom

It’s just like the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie except without the upbeat tone, rock solid structure, fun or proper lighting.

There is a clear break with the original production. It is apparent this is an afterthought. In other words, the first film wasn’t made to naturally lead into this piece. This leaves this film with a number of awkward moments where they attempt to retain the rules and characters from the first film while also forcing items in to develop a new narrative to set up the next film in the series.

Director Gore Verbinski seems uncontrolled with his action sequences to the point that his sword fighting scenes actually become tedious. Jack Sparrow and company become oddly dressed versions of Jackie Chan in some instances where they perform amazing acrobatics while fighting. The sequences move from interesting, to silly, to belligerently stupid.

This film will probably entertain but it won’t do much else. This is a lesser product than the first film and it is sorely obvious with each frame. This said, its still a better production than most Hollywood efforts these days.


Worldview: It is the same as the first but without all of the obfuscation. Jack Sparrow, a raping, thieving, murderer is celebrated as a positive character. While he is not revered as a good man, the film does promote his wickedness as a mere humorous character flaw.

Unlike the first film, there are almost no good people in this installment. Each character is out for themselves and themselves only. The only person trying to do actual good is Will Turner but he’s a secondary character and in the midst of the pirates his efforts are muted.


Production Notes: This is a dark movie. The reason for that is because it is the second film of three. When you have a trio of films that share the same narrative (the original Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Back to the Future, etc.) you’ll find the second is always the darkest (Empire Strikes Back, The Two Towers, Back to the Future II – the one where Biff controls the world). The reason for this is because this film is in essence the second act if you look at the films as one collective whole. Stories come in a number of acts. The act structure is simple. The first act is the opening, where everything is explained and the hero is given a task. The second act is the middle where the conflict occurs – this is a dark time where the hero may or may not be victorious. The final act is where the hero and company do final battle with the villain and eventually win. Again, this second film is the second act and therefore a dank view of the hero’s world.

Sit back and think of the second film in any series of movies and you’ll see this pattern emerge.


Cautions: There’s plenty of cartoon violence. In the beginning there are a couple scenes of horrific gore. A man gets his eye plucked out by a crow, for example. Following the very dark opening, the violence becomes more goofy. There’s no sexual imagery or cursing to be concerned about. The worst thing to be mindful of with this film is the backward worldview where good is bad and bad is good.


Other Reviews:
The Flickering Wall
ScreenIt


Orlando Bloom Movies:
Haven (2004)
Troy (2004)
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)

Labels: Bill Nighy, film, Johnny Depp, Kiera Knightly, movie review, Orlando Bloom