Gravity

Well, as awards season rolls round for another year, it is really no surprise that the number of 'genre-defining' film releases is certainly hotting up. Gravity is just one of those to be scheduled in the all-important Academy Award lead up, and just one viewing is all that's needed to demonstrate why. Quite simply, Gravity is an absolutely astonishing visual feat. Cinemagoers have long been used to the growing complexity and refinement of computer graphics and special effects in their favourite movies. What is so startling about Gravity is just how much of it falls into that category; as much as 95% of any given shot is probably computer generated (pretty much everything except the faces in the visors). And each and every pixel of it is absolutely photo real.

Ender's Game

I've made no secret of my inability in 99% of cases to compare cinema adaptations with their literary equivalents, but make no bones about it. The Film Cache is about the film itself, so regardless of real-world homophobia controversies or deviating re-imaginings from the original text, my business is reviewing the final on-screen product. In the case of Ender's Game, that result is a very competent piece of entertainment; a surprisingly in-depth psychological examination of childhood and the implications of growing up too quickly (if one was to read that much into it) married with some decent science fiction and credible acting performances.

Cloud Atlas

To say that Cloud Atlas is confusing is probably one of the biggest understatements of the year. Assuming you can get through the first 45 minutes (every single second of which with a puzzled expression permanently fixed to your face) I can promise that you'll be hooked until the end. A superbly written story (at least in book form, which most people had deemed unfilmable) combines with a perpetual succession of big name stars (including the lesser-spotted Hugh Grant bad guy) and an absolutely relentless pace to keep your attention right the way through. Don't get me wrong, it is requiring of a significant chunk of your time (and 100% of your attention) to make it all the way through and remain mentally unscathed, but it seems to me to be a wholly worthwhile investment. I also have no doubt that David Mitchell's book is probably far cleverer in telling the story than can be committed to screen. Indeed, it does rather play out as six short films in a single epic (with a running time to match), but despite the furious editing and bewildering story jumping (each of which include some outstanding performances from both the cast and production teams alike), each one of the plot lines immerses you so completely, that the final pay-off is simply six times as good.

Argo

You'd really hope you could expect a lot from a three-way Oscar winner, and Argo merrily lives up to almost all of those high expectations. With a lightning start out of the blocks, Argo's charm is partly in the attention to the minutia of the detail, and partly to the ludicrousness yet truth of the story (note, the subtleties of 'based on a true story' vs. 'a true story'). It's not often than Hollywood will allow itself to be parodied as badly as it is here, but then it's not everyday when it can claim to be the singlehanded saviour of a group of American embassy workers in a revolutionary Iran. And while that account is not entirely historically accurate (the CIA, US and Canadian administrations and local Canadian ambassador and diplomats did play relatively central roles too) the slight creative license can be relatively easily overlooked. Of more concern, despite the interest at the start, proceedings do get a teeny bit slow towards the middle, though are more then made up for by the end. In actual fact, the level of tension is kept pretty decent throughout, but done with enough care and attention to detail that it doesn't get tiring. What's more, while there are some familiar Hollywood faces present (director and leading man Ben Affleck being one of them), it's pleasing to see them actually blend into the story rather than standing out like the sore thumbed 'big names' that they are. In fact, the way that all the little things work together so seamlessly is probably the biggest reason that Argo has triumphed so magnificently in awards land, and pleasingly, it's easy to see why.

There's something worryingly pristine about that suit. No man should be able to wear a jacket without creasing it somewhere...

Vital Statistics
Director	Ben Affleck
Cast	Ben Affleck, Bryan Cranston, Alan Arkin, John Goodman
Length	120 mins
Post Credits Scene	Nothing 'post' as such, but one of the most poignant and beautiful 'true story' credits sequences, that just brings home the reality of the events, and how true to life the film was made to be
TFC Mash-Up	Charlie Wilson's War meets a Mad Men / Spooks cross-over episode
Star Rating

Pacific Rim

Pacific Rim may well have been one of the easiest Hollywood elevator pitches ever delivered; "think giant robots fighting massive aliens. Who wouldn't watch that?!". And indeed, that's exactly what we've ended up with, all wrapped up in some pseudo-story about apocalypse and confronting your past and family ties and whatever other sci-fi buzzwords could be crammed in round the edges. Fortunately, there is a touch more craft involved in Pacific Rim than just making a movie out of the Power Rangers Megazord (in this case, the Jaegers) vs. Godzilla (Kaijus), and it all falls to Guillermo del Toro's expert hand.

As could have been expected with del Toro's involvement, the visuals are pretty lush. The special effects are relatively decent for the most part (a little lessened by tiny things, such as the ability of an umbrella to stay completely static even with an army helicopter landing directly in front of it), and complemented by some surprisingly compelling 3D, especially for a film relying on the post-prod addition of the extra depth after the director quite literally changed his mind.

Aren't those the robots from the Citroen Xsara Picasso production line?

Given the mecha versus monster storyline, Pacific Rim is absolutely stuffed full of exactly the kind of cliché you'd expect; impossible-to-win battles, heart wrenching sacrifice, miracle resurrections - they're all here. But sort of unashamedly so. There's no pretence, no illusion. After all, you're watching a film that has sold itself on nothing save the sheer size of it's battling protagonists, so it would be tricky to hide behind any kind of more sophisticated veneer. This is one big walking, talking, alien bashing cliché, but knows it inside and out, and is all the better for admitting it and playing to its strengths.

Cherno Alpha; the biggest lighthouse in the Pacific

While the film is undoubtedly slightly slow in places, it does rather successfully curtail any kind of action fatigue - each fight sequence still feels fresh and interesting despite the fact that it's almost identical to the previous one, which makes a nice change from similar titles. Unfortunately, sandwiched in-between the battles, Pacific Rim is not quite as witty as it thinks it is, with more than a few lines falling a lot flatter than they probably sounded when they were written (not least in a rather damp excuse for a post-credits sting). We're also forced to put up with a rather annoying female lead in the form of Rinko Kikuchi's Mako Mori, who seems to spend the whole of her screen time being rather pathetically subservient to Idris Elba's leader of the Jaeger programme, or mooning over Charlie Hunnam's leading man. Poorly written girl characters aside though, Pacific Rim has plenty else going for it. As long as you know what you're going to see (Shakespeare, this is not), there is more than enough charm in the way the film has been made to be able to get over the lack of depth in the content. In my eyes, there was plenty of half naked Charlie Hunnam to satisfy the gay in me, and enough apocalyptic action to keep the excitable 8 year old me happy too... Take it at it's superficial best, and you'll be fine.

Vital Statistics
Director	Guillermo del Toro
Cast	Charlie Hunnam, Idris Elba, Rinko Kikuchi, Charlie Day, Robert Kazinsky, Max Martini, Ron Perlman
Length	131 mins
Post Credits Scene	Yes, but 15 seconds of a disappointing joke that totally misses the mark. Not worth sticking around for.
TFC Mash-Up	Transformers meets Cloverfield
Star Rating	

Man of Steel

I guess the name 'Superman Begins' might have been a little provocative for DC's latest attempt to re-establish the Man of Steel franchise in the ever burgeoning comic book movie world, but that's precisely the feeling this film has. A proper 'back to basics' reboot from arguably the most famous (and original) superhero, does rather beg the question why they've let Marvel have such an easy time of it until now.

Fortunately, the DC bosses can relax. Redeploying Christopher Nolan after his successful reinvention of Batman to oversee proceedings on the production and story front, and Zach Snyder from his directing duties post-Watchmen does rather suggest a pretty serious intent with two of DC's comic book movie heavyweights, but then this film did rather need to pack a rather considerable punch after the somewhat disappointing box-office affairs of 2006's 'Superman Returns'.

I know the Americans are proud of their superheroes... Just don't tell them Henry Cavill is British, OK?

And pack a punch it does. Several hundred in fact, and that would just be a conservative estimate. As beautiful and intense as they are, the action sequences are certainly plentiful, and as a result, generate a smidgen of 'destruction fatigue'. In fact, by the end, I was more concerned with how much it was going to cost to pay for the considerable amount of damage, than with the visual flair of the devastation that was being inflicted.

Fortunately, for anyone of a similar disposition to myself, Russell Crowe is not unbearable, which does come as a welcome surprise. Less fortunate however is Amy Adam's worryingly complacent Lois Lane, who certainly doesn't provide enough of a match for Clark Kent to make it a particularly even pitting of the sexes, or provide any meaningful momentum towards passing the Bechdel test. Elsewhere though, there is plenty to get excited about. As has come to be expected in this nature of origin movie, Man of Steel doesn't disappoint original series aficionados, filling the screens with a cheeky selection of fan-nuggets, including fleeting but pleasing references to Smallville and Lex-Corp.

Don't you just hate it when you stub your toe?

The story itself does feel a little choppy and confusing in patches; possibly indicative of some fairly rigorous cutting which has sacrificed some coherency to the storyline. At 143 minutes, it does feel a little like it needed a bit more fat trimmed, but more because there was too much story to tell in the time available than because there are any particular moments that drag. What does remain however retains a wonderfully welcome lack of 90's cheese and Kryptonite, though those have been replaced by some slightly over-worthy dialogue that doesn't quite gel with the genre. That said, despite the over-the-top action porn, inexcusably poorly written female roles and arse-numbingly long story, Man of Steel is certainly a very worthy basis for an updated series to come. And if recent Comic-Con announcements are anything to go by, it will have added a bit of well-needed vigour to the DC movie line-up, with a potentially juicy pipeline to come...

The Hunt For Red October

I'm not too proud to admit when I'm mistaken, and The Hunt For Red October is certainly one of those times; a film I had prematurely written off as a vintage (and by vintage, read 1990) novel-turned-blockbuster cash-in of Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan series. And while some of that sentiment is still no doubt the case, the resulting movie is even now still worthy of the plaudits gained at the time of its release, easily standing up to any number of its more modern Cold War cousins. Undoubtedly, part of the charm comes from the unexpectedly strong cast list (personal feelings about Alec Baldwin aside), with Sean Connery's familiarly soothing tones distracting from some otherwise questionable Russian accents. And despite some dubious blue screen work (thankfully kept to minimum) doing its best to interrupt proceedings, the movie as a whole skips along at a pace, with very little fat to trim from the edges. Perhaps it's because of the astonishing attention to detail (presumably coming from the original text), or perhaps it's just because of Sean Connery's most excellent pronunciation of the phrase "sonar nets", but either way, Hunt For Red October is certainly not one to be written off. Lesson learned.

"Thish blue shcreen ish worryingly poor. Shomeone'sh going to figure out we're not where we shay we are."

The Perks of Being A Wallflower

Perks is the subject of a bit of a divide in my friends, seemingly stemming primarily from whether people are familiar with the original book or not. As is the case in the majority of these situations, my movie viewing came with a staggering lack of awareness of the written version, a fact which was subsequently very rapidly rectified. Regardless of my initially insufficient appreciation of literature however, the film placed me firmly and without question on the positive side of the fence. While at its heart a seemingly basic coming of age story, the whole thing in fact caught me more than a little off-guard in how it affected me. Undoubtedly part of the impact lies in how much I found I could identify with the eponymous wallflower (in this case Logan Lerman, who certainly ups the film's rank in the gay stakes), but there is something so beautiful in the story and the way the super-talented cast tell it that makes it instantly compelling. Even beyond that though, never before has a movie moved me so dramatically, and for such an extended period, that I have felt forced to buy and read the book version within 12 hours of even finishing the film. And while I find it almost impossible to explain exactly how I felt about the whole affair at the time, it is perhaps unsurprising that the single closest description I have found comes in the simple yet poetically predictive form of the opening few lines of both film and book; "I am both happy and sad and I'm still trying to figure out how that could be".

Ladies and gentlemen, take note; eyebrow acting at its very best.

 

Star Trek Into Darkness

OK then JJ; franchise successfully rebooted, now it's time for the difficult second album. And what a challenge that is when the franchise is as big as Star Trek. 47 years, 726 TV episodes, 11 previous films and a cult following of millions just add up to the scale of the task at hand, not least trying to top the rebooted prequel itself. And so, with that level of pressure from all fronts, it would have been easy to understand if Abrams and his team had maybe dropped one or two of the more contentious balls they were carrying with this movie. Yet the result of all those heightened expectations is actually a beautiful hybrid movie, able to satisfy even the most devout Trekkie, yet still appeal to Starfleet newbies. Not a mean feat.

With JJ. Abrams at the helm again, it should really be no surprise that the action sequences in this film come thick and fast. The absolute pleasure is that every single one of them is absolutely sterling (rather elegantly defined as 'thoroughly excellent'), and coupled in all instances by some truly top-notch visual effects. The cast once again turn in some incredibly worthy performances, with particular mention of course going to Benedict Cumberbatch's exquisitely understated villain.

You'd be surprised just how much 23rd century technology is based on present day cow birthing techniques.

Holding fast to the spoiler-free mantra of TFC, I'm not about to go and divulge vast swathes of story secrets, but suffice to say, the alternate timeline started in the 2009 reboot does give the team scope for some rather jolting reimaginings of storylines from the Star Trek back catalogue (like the previous Vulcan storyline), which are most certainly used to devastating effect.

With the scale of success Abrams is seeing within the Star Trek universe, his appointment as the head of the project to bring back the next biggest science fiction franchise comes as very little surprise. Unfortunately, with Star Wars (Episode VII) now occupying the top spot on his ever-lengthening priority list, it remains to be seen whether the third story will wait, or if the franchise will continue under a new commander in chief. One thing is for sure though, regardless of when it comes; as with any trilogy, now that the temperamental middle child is in the bag, the stakes are even higher to make a hit of the perennially tricky final album.

Blackfish

I never concerned myself with the typical boy passions when I was younger. Dinosaurs, sharks, guns and cars were all the territory of my younger brother when we were kids, leaving my time free for fluffier pleasures. My (more effeminate) interest of choice was the elegance and beauty of whales and dolphins, fuelled primarily by the excitement of the Free Willy trilogy, a couple of trips to Windsor Safari Park and even the holy grail of a day at SeaWorld in Florida. What a treat then that my first film of the 2013 Sundance London season should be Gabriela Cowperthwaite's 'Blackfish', a partly beautiful, partly chilling documentary examining the affairs of Tilikum the Killer Whale, the veritable daddy of about half of all Orcas currently kept in captivity, and the subject of a number of cases of aggression and indeed murder of his human trainers.

I knew very little of the subject going into the film. I have even been to SeaWorld myself and experienced the magical time that is enjoyed by the several million park guests that walk through their Orlando gates every year. I'll even admit to having completely escaped any mention of the latest court case brought against them in 2010 by the American Health and Safety organisation OSHA which forms a significant part of Cowperthwaite's story. What Blackfish does do though, is tell what could be a particularly linear and relatively quick story in a really quite persuasive and well paced way. Tension is one thing that is delivered in spades. As the brutal realism of the story becomes ever more chillingly apparent, the use of interviews with ex-trainers, home videos and park's own footage continually crank up the horror, making the final realisation (one which required both hands over my face - one for my gaping disbelieving mouth, and one to cover my eyes) altogether inescapable.

Open wide: while there's no denying how incredibly special these animals are, Blackfish does raise a few questions about how we should look after and appreciate their beauty

Whilst certainly not a truly impartial view, the story that Blackfish unfolds is both so unknown yet truly important that it should receive more eyes than those captive at Sundance London alone. Gabriela's own view in the Q&A afterwards perhaps told you everything you need to know; would she continue to go to SeaWorld? "Yes, but I'd go a little more aware of exactly what I was seeing".

Iron Man 3

Once again, I'm faced with a review dilemma. Do I make mention of my invitation to the premiere, sharing a red carpet with Robert, Sir Ben and Don (first name terms now) and sat a few rows behind Dermot O'Leary and the boys from JLS, and instantly sound like a toe-curlingly horrendous show-off? Or just subtly ignore the fact that I'm actually publishing this review a week before the film's actual release date? Well, I think we all know what kind of guy I am...

Iron Man's explosive return to the big screen not only rounds off his own personal trilogy, but also gives Tony Stark the rather dubious pleasure of having the first crack at Marvel film life post-Avengers. And while some (myself included) may have thought that the rod fashioned for his own back may simply have been too great, it's a thrill to be able to report that there are some genuine treats to be had. In fact, if anything, the team seem to have learnt so much of what worked from the Avengers that this film is actually much better for it.

For their first trick, Iron Man 3 is surprisingly laugh out loud funny, complete with some particular gems for British audiences (a joke about Croydon and some well crafted references to Downton Abbey being particularly well received at the premiere). The 3D achieved on this film is also very impressive, and perhaps some of the slickest and most immersive I've seen. Frequent references to events of previous films also help to keep an audience fully immersed in the franchise's universe, and almost effortlessly weave a much bigger narrative into this single film without compromising the plotline of the individual exploits of Tony Stark and co.

Fact of the day: snow angels are no more impressive when done in an armoured suit

All that said, though a more than valiant effort, Iron Man 3 isn't without it's faults. The pace does dip slightly low in places, a facet only made forgivable by the fact that the character empathy has almost become soap-ish at this stage, so regardless of the lull between the action set pieces, you still care what's happening to them. There is also a degree of suspension of disbelief required for some of the plot points. In fact, there are some that may even need a doctorate, as the story becomes so far fetched in places (yes, even more than an over-engineered body suit powered by a clean energy reactor driven electromagnet that keeps a piece of shrapnel out of a billionaire playboy engineer's heart) that even the possibility of one of the suits turning out to be C3PO starts to sound plausible.

As far as the actors are concerned, all the main faces are well and truly back. Much as Johnny Depp is to Jack Sparrow, Robert Downey Jr. continues to make it impossible for anyone else to ever play that role, and delivers some first-class dialogue expertly. The biggest shout-out however really must go to Sir Ben Kingsley, who aside from very obviously having one of the best written baddie roles since Keyser Söze, is blatantly having the time of his life playing it as well.

Scrapheap Challenge; bedroom style

Overall then, it's difficult not to rate this instalment as the best in the Iron Man saga. Provided you are willing to just accept whatever is presented to you, however unlikely or implausible, Iron Man 3 does well in learning from all the best bits of previous Marvel offerings, and delivers a truly impressive single character film straight off the back of last summer's spectacular. While the end-of-credits mini-scene is certainly not the strongest of the series (and for the first time, doesn't whet any kind of appetite of exciting things to come), it seems almost inconceivable that having learnt so much from their past in making this film so strong, we should be any less enthusiastic about the next instalments in the personal Thor and Captain America sagas, both due in the next 12 months.

Les Misérables

So, as a theatre fan myself, it needs to be noted up front; this is not a stage show on film. Anyone watching with that presumption has completely missed the point, and will ultimately be missing out. Instead, the film version explicitly takes advantage of the medium it's presented in, spinning the story to an ever darker and grittier revolutionary France than on stage, able to show every tear strewn cheek, every dirt smeared flag and every blood covered street in close-up, high definition. And close up it very much is. Tom Hooper's lingering single takes and full head shot close ups leaves the actors absolutely nowhere to hide, almost forcing them to deliver sensational performances. It should leave little surprise then that so many have subsequently been lauded for their performances (including Anne Hathaway's recent BAFTA win). In fact, it's only Russell Crowe that seems to be a slightly weak link, feeling almost uncomfortable in role, or at the very least, in being made to sing.

Well I can certainly hear the people sing. Though there was hardly going to be a review of Les Mis without a picture of Eddie Redmayne, was there?

On that subject, there really is something to be said for the live singing. Whilst certainly not flawless, it is positively wringing with a level of emotion that just wouldn't be possible from a studio audio track. In fact, it may very well be the various vocal cracks and blemishes that adds the depth of reality to the story we see on screen.

While certainly not one of the best films of all time, and the fact that it's a musical which will instantly rule out a vast population who very much prefer other cups of tea, it's very easy to see why Les Mis has done so well this awards season. But do me a favour; if you do watch it, do so for the merits of the silver screen (or, if you're that way inclined, Eddie Redmayne). If you're more interested in the soundtrack, you might be better off in the West End.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

"In a hole in the ground there lived a Hobbit", so the story says. And so, almost exactly nine years to the day after begrudgingly leaving Middle Earth, Peter Jackson has finally decided it's time it was told. And told properly by the sound of it. 3D, double the industry standard frame rates, and circa 300 pages (in my edition at least) spread into three truly blockbuster films (An Unexpected Journey really living the definition of epic at just shy of 3 hours).

Lets deal with the latter point first; yes, three films. From 300 pages. To put that in context, the original publications of the Lord of the Rings trilogy carried a much more impressive 1571 pages. And three films were crafted from that. Now I'm not for a second going to suggest that everything from those fifteen-hundred pages was used in the original film series, but it does just contextualise the scale of the difference with this new trilogy. To be honest, I was happily on-board with the original two film premise. That seemed plenty sufficient enough to tell the story I remember from the book in typically lavish Jackson fashion. The extension to three that was announced in late July this year does therefore grate somewhat, even in spite of Jackson's assertion that the embellishments are taken directly from Tolkien's own notes on additions that he wanted to bring to his own story. Unfortunately, that initial instinct does hold some truth when watching the film, which does feel padded, and more annoyingly, almost self-indulgent in places when it seems to find requirement to go off topic in wild tangents. Indeed, the fact that after almost three hours of the luscious New Zealand visuals and seamless WETA effects we're only concluding the sixth chapter of the book goes some way to demonstrate the expansion of the story that has gone into the film.

Something tells me that the wig department had a field day on this film...

All that said, there is plenty in the three hours to keep almost any audience entertained. It seems almost redundant to say, but nods to the book are plentiful (including several direct quotations of key lines, a particularly nice touch for the bigger Tolkien fans), and indeed numerous salutes to the previous films as well (perhaps the most obvious of course being Elijah Wood and Ian Holm reprising their roles as Frodo and (old) Bilbo respectively). Pleasingly, those touches do give the first Hobbit film an enormously familiar feel, though that does come with rather a double edged sword. Truth be told, it feels great to be back in Middle Earth; this film is a welcome return to the world of absolute beauty, wonder and mythology that could only be the product of a genius like Tolkien's, but on occasion it doesn't really feel like anything has changed or improved. Tellingly, there are several shots that Peter Jackson could just have substituted in from the first film and nobody would have been any the wiser. As a result, although it feels totally comfortable and brilliantly in keeping as part of the fuller film series, there are very few occasions when anything feels particularly 'new'.

One thing that has changed of course is Peter Jackson's choice of technology. The aforementioned 48fps is double the typical Hollywood frame rate, a theatrical standard that has been in use since 1927. Put in context, that does seem like a long overdue leap forward, and of course, it does have quite splendid results, with the sweeping vistas and high quality special effects looking even more crisp and immersive. The scene with Gollum is of particular note here, and the extra detail does certainly help the movie do justice to such a pivotal and iconic moment, which is brilliantly delivered by Andy Serkis (though truth be told, he's had long enough to get the character right!). That said, the higher frame rate does deliver rather more mixed results in close up shots, and most particularly in close up action sequences. An unwanted side effect means that the effect does have to be rather perfect, as the additional texture and frame definition is a little more unforgiving of the poorer quality effects, of which there are indeed a few.

Someone's not happy... Bloody Bagginses.

Despite sounding increasingly negative in this review, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey actually has an awful lot going for it. As previously mentioned (and as you'd pretty much expect from Jackson and his team) 99% of the visuals are truly breathtaking. Yes, Jackson plays up to it, so a new panorama is seemingly crow-barred in as frequently as possible, but when they look as good as they do, it's mostly forgivable. The added familiarity also adds it's own distinct advantage, bringing with it that sense of magic that just rekindles the excitement of seeing the original series for the first time (so much so that I wanted to go home and rewatch them all immediately). Sure, there are a myriad of moments so forgettable they escape notice before even leaving the cinema, but the bits in the middle that string the story along are certainly more than worthy enough to hold your gaze and attention for the full 169 minutes (105 pages).

Looper

Uh oh! Another JGL movie review! Quite aside from seeming like the most active guy in Hollywood right now, we can all relax on this one; spending 2 hours a day in make-up to make yourself look like a young Bruce Willis is never going to have the most appealing result, so Looper is going to have to rely on a whole lot more to get the grade from me.

The principle is beautifully original, and fabulously ingenious all in one. Time travel doesn't exist. Yet. As soon as it does (thirty years from now) it will immediately be made illegal, but not before crime bosses realise that it offers the cleanest and most elegant way of "dealing" with those unwanted nuisances. Cue the 'Loopers', the disposal men responsible for removing the victims of the future mob. Their targets are erased; killed in a time when they shouldn't have existed, and with no evidence of them in the future. For a Looper, each job is paid handsomely, with silver bars strapped to their prey. That is until their final job (called closing the loop), which results in the personal assassination of their future self, effectively granting them a thirty year time-delayed death sentence with which to enjoy their 'retirement'. And truth be told, everything is going pretty swimmingly, until Joe fails to close his loop, and allows his thirty-year older equivalent (Bruce Willis) to escape. Cue an unravelable twisting road of cause and effect, with both Joe's aiming to restore order to their respective times, and ultimately stay alive.

Things were always going to get ugly when it came to deciding who was going to pay the bill...

Now don't get me wrong; Hollywood needs more films like this. Looper is properly innovative (some people likened it to when the world was first introduced to the Matrix). Everything about it feels fresh, of course helped by the fact that it's a completely unique concept. But that does bring it's own issues. Being such a radically different (and as explained above) slightly convoluted storytype, the time required to set up the premise is so much longer than would be needed to introduce us to the world of an unpopular high-school teen, or a mis-understood billionaire with a penchant for saving the world. And unfortunately Looper's set-up does fall slightly foul of this. Because the concept is so complicated and unseen before now, the film has to spend too long trying to explain what's going on, and why it's important. As a result, the whole thing does feel fairly slow up front, even though there's plenty to be paying attention to. The whole thing also sets off on a much darker footing than I was expecting, which, although perhaps slightly too dark in places for my liking, do certainly provide an important background to the fuller story.

Thankfully though, despite the rather gritty (and lengthy) start, the movie quickly opens up into something so much better than I was beginning to fear 30 minutes in. Some rather expert writing and editing keeps up the suspense, only feeding answers in dribs and drabs, but keeping you guessing throughout. The cast should also get a special mention, with Emily Blunt's Sara of particular note (once you've managed to get over her southern drawl). In the end, for me the quirkiness and originality really win through. It may be slightly slow to get going, but when it does it more than compensates. Though a smidgen gorier than I would have liked in places, the story is well thought through all the way to the end (especially concerning the cause to effect relationship of changing the present to affect the future). With maybe a little more pace up front, this is the kind of film that we really need to see more of.

50/50

Cynics of this blog may say that I'm going to be particularly biased in my review of 50/50 because of my ongoing infatuation with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. And those people would be absolutely correct. But cute leads aside, this film is actually quite different in what it tries to do; aiming to show the funny side of a cancer story through comedy. Now that's quite a provocative statement, especially as 50/50 is certainly a long way from being just candy and belly-laughs, but at the centre is a really delicately written story (which comes as no surprise to be based on real life) that mixes in just enough light-hearted humour to counteract the darkness and depression of the diagnosis.

Without wanting to read much like the back of a DVD case, 50/50’s main theme isn’t really the effects of cancer, or the journey that comes with a treatment as devastating as chemotherapy. Centrally, the story is all about relationships; the (at times dysfunctional) friendship between JGL’s Adam and Seth Rogen’s Kyle (essentially playing a fictionalised version of himself), the failing liaison with girlfriend Rachael, and the broken bonds with his parents (especially his mother). Each one is dealt with delicately, not least by an excellent cast, but certainly helped by an incredibly well written story that can only really have been created by the person at the centre, and presumably helped by Seth Rogen who experienced it all first hand.

Genuinely shaving your head while improvising the scene? Meet the very riskiest of one-take wonders...

Overall, 50/50 strikes a really harmonious balance between comedy and drama, becoming a beautiful hybrid of the genres. In places, it’s difficult to do anything but get engulfed by the overwhelming sense of loneliness that ultimately just makes you want to reach into the screen and give him a hug. But contrasting them, the comic flair (mainly with the highly capable Seth Rogen at the helm) provides plenty of charming chuckle-inducing relief, and numerous moments that even the gloomiest of audience members will struggle not to crack a smile at.

Sucker Punch

Sucker Punch is a movie that really gives nothing away from it's title. But then, what else do you call a film that treats you to clockwork Nazi zombies, dragons and bomb-laden trains full of robot guards?

Simplified, Sucker Punch shows a girl's escape to a fantasy world, when the real-world becomes too traumatic to bear any longer. Truth be told, it takes most of the film to let you understand that, as the whole thing twists along as a proper head-fuck.

Acting wise, it's a relatively mixed bag. There are some familiar faces that I really wouldn't have expected to find in a place like this, but the film relies more heavily on some astonishingly slick visuals than the actual actors to maintain any kind of engagement. To be fair, they do a stunning job with the effects, with transitions into fantasy worlds being flawlessly executed single-shots, and the sequences themselves about as luscious as they can be.

Is it just me, or does this look suspiciously like the girls have just landed in a burning Hogwarts?

Reviews elsewhere have been pretty negative for Sucker Punch, and I can see why. But for me, there's enough else going on that can more than make up for the shortcomings. The story is really unusual (a bonus in modern day film-making), but the ultimate twist (or sucker punch) just makes it so worthwhile to watch at least once.

The Dark Knight Rises

So the time has come - the finale in Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight franchise, and the release of one of the most anticipated films of 2012. And while there's certainly a lot riding on this given the quality of the previous two films, Mr. Nolan has made rather a rod for his own back, making audiences expectant of his last minute plot twists, and hoping to catch him out at every turn. His latest effort is a decided mixed success, with parts that could be critiqued for being somewhat predictable, yet others that can only be praised for being comprehensively uncrackable.

Away from the storyline itself, Nolan's unmistakable cinematic style is evident in abundance. The word epic is all too often bandied around without much in the way of justification, and yet there are few other words that seem fitting to describe The Dark Knight Rises. The sheer scale of the special effects is just mind-blowing, made all the better in IMAX which over an hour of the movie is shot in (more than double that of it's trilogy predecessor).

Bane always kept a photograph of Ben Fogle with him, just in case...

On the flip side, I seem to be have been getting hyper critical over film length of late, and unfortunately The Dark Knight Rises isn't faultless in this respect. Though thoroughly entertaining throughout, there are moments that I felt could have been kept a smidgen tighter, and closer to the two and a half hour mark. I know there are countless who won't agree with me, but some scenes do feel more self-indulgent in their inclusion, with particular mention going to the Karate Kid-style philosophical sideline of self-discovery which added nothing to the main story arc at all.

As ever, it's nice to see Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who's fabulous performance certainly doesn't let him down as a new addition to the Dark Knight franchise. That said though, he is just one of a stellar cast list as we have come to expect from the trilogy, with Michael Caine once again being the standout, turning in an Oscar-worthy performance from start to finish. Aside from all the big names though, a personal little side mention is needed for Christopher Judge - an actor very much a part of my youth years who will have bounced onto and off the cinema screen in his role in this film without notice from anyone but myself and perhaps a handful of others; it's great to see such a familiar face in such a big movie. As other familiar faces go, this film very much represented the conclusion of the trilogy, and as seems to be tradition, many old faces (friendly and not) were brought back to see us off. There were some lovely touches made to bring back all the big names (some particularly fleeting), with only Heath Ledger notable by his absence for obvious reasons.

Did anyone really think I'd manage to write a review of The Dark Knight Rises without a picture of JGL in it? Shame on you...

Overall, The Dark Knight Rises seems a fitting finale to such a phenomenally successful trilogy, which has grown in epicness (yes, I'm inventing words now) throughout every installment. Hats off to Nolan for still being able to catch an audience out (despite everyone's best intentions in the cinema), but my biggest praise is being reserved for the duo in charge of casting. Such a collosal story needs a properly outstanding cast list, and this film certainly delivers both.

The Amazing Spider-Man

So it's not everyday that you can go to the cinema and watch a $230 million Hollywood blockbuster starring someone that you have acted with in your teens. And yet, such is my experience with The Amazing Spider-Man. Sadly, I can't say that we kept in touch, but that does mean I am free to be totally impartial about Andrew Garfield's big new multi-million dollar film franchise role here (with no bitterness whatsoever). Truth be told though, it's well earned. Andrew seems to slip into the red and blue lycra all too easily, and manages to carry the rebooted story incredibly ably (looking annoyingly handsome in the process).

That said, the storyline itself does seem to provide a few problems for the film. By the nature of reboots (and especially true of such a well known 'origins' story as Spider-man), the film does occasionally feel constrained in having to tick certain boxes just to get them out of the way. The spider biting for example is such an intrinsic moment for whatever comes next (which by the sounds of it will be a Hollywood trilogy at the least), that it really needs to be a bigger deal than was made of it. It almost seemed to skip by; just a minor inconvenience in the story that the film makers were trying to tell. That said however, to their credit, while some things were lost, others gained enormously. Marc Webb's version (you can't make up Hollywood puns like this) put a massive amount of focus on showing the evolving relationships of the protagonists, and as a result, pivotal scenes like Uncle Ben's death and the resulting relationship between Peter and Aunt May are truly beautiful. In fact, this film is full of incredibly poignant moments, which is a big (and in my opinion, very welcome) departure from the Spider-man franchise of old.

You seem confused. They're books Andrew. They should live in the shelf behind you...

The double-edged sword of poignancy is that the film can feel slightly slow in places, and at a little over two and a quarter hours, could possibly have benefited from a smidgen of tightening round the edges. Unfortunately, some parts also had a tendency to feel slightly schizophrenic - this film made deliberately grittier than previous installments, and yet still seeming unable to escape from certain comic book clichés that jar with the rest of the film.

Overall though, while this film seemed hell-bent on re-establishing the characters of the franchise under the new 'Amazing' paradigm, the effort put into shaping the relationships between the main characters is certainly worthy of the stars that it's been awarded. As a result though, it can feel slightly like a two-hour set up for something yet to come, so while it is a perfectly enjoyable film in it's own right, I'm hoping for truly amazing (see what I did there?!) things to come now that the producers are free of the 'shackles' of re-telling, and can focus on the story they want the world to see.

(500) Days of Summer

For me, the charm of '(500) Days of Summer' is really simple; it's so unlike anything else. Right from the outset, the film makes it clear that what you're witnessing is not a typical love story, and that's a promise it delivers on in spades. Though in essence it follows exactly the same clichéd pattern for the Hollywood rom-com norm, there is plenty else going on to keep the film's indie feel alive (aside from the fact that it is one, of course).

Not your typical love story... Personally, I don't know what her problem is. I totally would.

Needlesstosay, any film that allows us just over an hour and a half of looking at Joseph Gordon-Levitt is going to be tricky to mark down, but fortunately, there's not much to be disappointed by. Even the time jumps (always a tricky concept to get right without either becoming overly confusing or stupendously annoying) are easy to follow, and actually serve to develop the story and the characters, rather than becoming a directorial add-on.

That said, it's not just the storyline that keeps the film's quirky feel. The visual style, including pencil drawing animations, and simultaneous side-by-side versions of the same scene add real character and charm to the film, and just serve to separate it further from it's (sometimes) stale Hollywood cousins.

Overall then, (500) Days is a really touching little movie, overtly choosing to take a fresh look at a staple movie genre, and rebel against it from the outset. The result received a standing ovation at the Sundance Film Festival in 2009 (so Wikipedia tells me), and truth be told, it's not difficult to see why.

Chasing Ice

I have always tended away from feature length documentaries. Perhaps a foolish sentiment, but I've just always thought it easier and more rewarding to be immersed in fiction. Never have I been proven so wrong than with 'Chasing Ice'. As one of the films honoured with a place at this year's Sundance (and indeed picking up one of the prestigious cinematography awards from the festival), that should perhaps have been a little more evident up front.

Put simply (possibly overly so), 'Chasing Ice' is the big screen account of a nature photographer's mission to obtain and showcase undeniable evidence of the impacts of global climate change through the ever-evolving ice landscapes. The resulting film is a supremely beautiful example of documentary film-making at it's best. Aside from evoking emotions of utter jealousy from me (any other combination of two of my major passions without me being involved is likely to do the same thing), 'Chasing Ice' also manages to be genuinely touching; a seemingly illogical thing for what is ostensibly a photography documentary. And yet there is just something about James Balog, the photographer in question, that just makes you desperate to come along for the ride.

The point that James Balog realised he could get the field assistant to do all the really dangerous bits... (Yes, that tiny speck in the distance is a person)

To be fair, both he and the film-makers were particularly blessed with the subject matters they had in hand. The breathtaking scenery of the Earth's glaciers make it very difficult not to be able to take an truly stunning shot, though the film does rather quickly show the lengths that James will go to, and his mission to ever push one step further. In fact, for the film-makers, it is James himself, his team and his enormous passion that are nothing short of a gift. It was in fact James that founded the Extreme Ice Survey (EIS), the photograph-based glacier study which 'Chasing Ice' is in fact about. That in itself is nothing short of impressive; EIS is one of the most thorough scientific glacial measurement programmes on the Earth, and now has as many as 43 time-lapse cameras permanently stationed watching glaciers all over the world, and recording data every half an hour during daylight. What started as one man's campaign to be able to demonstrate the dramatic effects of global climate change, has now become one of the most important scientific records of glacial activity ever documented.

Difficult not to be completely in awe.

Though it's only inevitable that some will dismiss this as yet another piece of climate propaganda, it's perhaps more upsetting that more people won't get to see this. Though the director aspires for 'Chasing Ice' to appear as part of the curriculum in American schools, I worry that too many people will just be put off by the idea of another film about climate change (let's face it, not even having Leonardo DiCaprio in it helped 'The 11th Hour'). In this case though, even aside from the political, social and environmental lessons, 'Chasing Ice' is actually a fabulous piece of work; beautifully shot, spectacular scenery, and some truly touching and even poignant moments. Sadly though, those are not going to be enough on their own to convince the vast majority to see the film, regardless of their environmental viewpoint.