Mutant Fan And Proud!

It’s been eleven years since the first X-Men film, and therefore eleven years since the last decent one was seen on the big screen. Thankfully, First Class gives a breath of fresh air to a franchise that has seriously deteriorated since the start.

First Class is a prequel set in 1962 telling us the story of the origins of the X-Men, back when Charles Xavier (still with hair and the ability to walk!) was a charming post-graduate from Oxford and Erik Lehnsherr was a Bond-esque assassin intent on getting revenge on the man who killed his mother and experimented on him as a child in a concentration camp. They meet and discover what at first appears to be a kindred spirit in one another, becoming fast friends and uncovering a common enemy in the psychopathic and sadistic Sebastian Shaw, the man Erik had been seeking all his adult life. Gathering a group of young mutants, they set out with the government to stop Shaw and his Hellfire Club from starting World War Three during the Cuban Missile Crisis and killing pretty much every human alive in the process.

Firstly, it has to be said that the acting in this film is unmatched in any of the previous films. Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan were Charles and Erik until James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender came along and made them look awful by comparison. McAvoy is incredible as the young Charles who makes the most of his telepathy to seduce women, going through life being quite smug about his ability. He is far cry from the asexual, consistently serious and borderline dull Charles we know from the first three films; in this he is much more fun to start off with, and then we begin to see McAvoy portray his serious side whilst remaining charming and interesting at the same time. McAvoy’s performance makes me laugh, admire, and even cry at one point (really, I did. You’ll understand when you see it, I won’t ruin anything), and I honestly didn’t believe that I could respect him as an actor more than I already did, but I certainly do after seeing this.

Fassbender also is excellent, playing the tortured soul, both physically and mentally, hellbent on seeking revenge on Shaw. He brings a vulnerability to Erik not seen in previous films, as he is still adjusting and developing his power and we see the real torment of his childhood only hinted at in the original film. Like McAvoy, Fassbender portrays Erik in an entirely different way to what we have already seen, not the calm but sinister Magneto in the original series but an angry man just determined to get revenge on those who hurt him as a child. He also, however, brings traces of the later series to his performance as the film progresses; towards the end, we can see some of the mindset that Magneto has in the first films, rather than just the personal vendetta that occupies his character for most of the film.

The other successful performance in this is the one by Kevin Bacon, because you absolutely hate his character, Shaw, from the very start. From experimenting on a young child prisoner to influencing the government to start a war with Russia, he is incredibly sinister from the outset, with no reasoning other that to ensure that only the more worthy mutants exist on earth. However, he completely steals every scene he is in by exuding such calm power over other characters.

Not a lot can be said for anyone else really. Other characters aren’t really that developed, which I suppose is a flaw in the film, though with strong rumours aplenty circulating about another two prequel-sequels after this then I am not too worried about this. I stated in a previous post that I was unsure about the female casting in the film, and this opinion didn’t really change a lot. However, despite what some critics are saying, I thought that January Jones was quite good as the cool Emma Frost/White Queen, the perfect sidekick I thought for Bacon’s Shaw. I actually look forward to seeing more of her in the next films. Jennifer Lawrence and Rose Byrne still failed to impress though. Lawrence’s Raven/Mystique just seemed moody and jealous of Charles’ relationships with others, and any romantic interest in Nicholas Hoult’s Hank McCoy/Beast completely disintegrates relatively quickly. Her one line that appears to be becoming a catchphrase (which I do not approve of) "Mutant and Proud" (see the blog title!) even gets annoying after a while because of the fact it's overused so much. The way she ended the film also annoyed me, but again I won’t ruin it by saying why – all I will say is that the audience won’t relate to her as a character and her motives aren’t really explained, which is frustrating at the end. Byrne, playing the only human main character, Moira McTaggart, seemed to spend most of the time being in awe of the mutants she is working with, and her romantic interest in Charles seems very unnecessary in the film. I know fans of the franchise would be disappointed that she is not Scottish as she is portrayed in the comic books and will miss that international aspect, but that really isn’t important when she isn’t really necessary in the film except for establishing a link between the mutants and the government. With so many other bigger characters in the mutants, she seems to be overshadowed and doesn’t really have a lot to do.

Other performances were acceptable. Nicholas Hoult, playing Beast, was very sweet, up until he completely insulted Raven, and then the audience kind of lose a bit of respect for him. However, his acting throughout is very good, and up until he makes that faux pas, we do feel quite sorry for him, being the one who is picked on all the time for his mutation. The other mutants, like I said, weren’t really explored very much and so there was quite limited screen time for them to prove themselves as worthy characters to the audience. However, most of what I saw I did like. Lucas Till’s Alex Summers/Havok and Caleb Landry-Jones’ Sean Cassidy/Banshee look like they could have a bromance going on in the next films, and their screen time together in certain scenes during the climactic battle are quite good – they seem to have good chemistry going on there.

The cameos in the film have to be applauded. Though they only last for a couple of seconds each, fans of the series will get a kick out of seeing them. Hugh Jackman’s seven seconds on screen was better acted than I have seen in the first four films of the series, and it genuinely made me laugh. He is also the first person to drop the F-bomb in the series, which was also amusing. Rebecca Romaijn also appears briefly, as Mystique tries to seduce Erik and, after being rejected for being too young, shape-shifts into her older self. No, their appearances didn’t bring anything to the story and their sole purpose was to give fans a kick, but they were definitely still worth having in there. The only thing I missed was Stan Lee’s signature cameo as some random member of the public, which we didn’t get this time and was therefore a little disappointing.

I honestly can’t write this review without mentioning the accents of the characters. It seemed like more than half of them were using a different accent to their normal one, which I didn’t mind for the most part – I doubt I would have even picked up on them if I didn’t already know about them. McAvoy did his posh British accent wonderfully, and Hoult was actually quite impressive in his American role. However, I have to comment on Michael Fassbender. He started off so well, quite convincing as a… European, I guess. I don’t really know what accent he’s meant to have, but Ian McKellan uses a British one despite Erik’s German origins, so we’ll go with that. However, it seemed that two-thirds of the way through he just gave up on trying to maintain it, which I really don’t understand. Surely they didn’t film it in chronological order, so I don’t understand why it appears on some days he could do an accent well, and on others he just casually reverted back to his natural Irish accent. Even in the trailers you can hear it, which I’m sure they would have wanted to avoid. What I also don’t understand is how no-one in the whole production seemed to notice and correct him. I have to say though, that instead of being annoying or distracting, it was actually rather amusing, as it seemed to come out during important, serious scenes. And actually, it was rather distracting, but it was thoroughly entertaining, so he is forgiven. Saying all that, I have to credit him for his multilingual skills – he speaks fluently in German and French several times – which he showed off during the film.

The special effects and action sequences are to be applauded too. There is some pretty impressive stuff, from Erik pulling a submarine from the ocean using his powers and Mystique changing her appearance regularly to Emma Frost transforming into diamond form and Azazel (a member of the Hellfire Club who happens to be red. And an alien, so therefore not really a mutant) teleporting rapidly whilst killing soldiers. The climactic battle is very well done, though with everyone fighting each other – it does get a little confusing, with mutants against humans, humans against mutants and mutants against mutants… - it’s a little too chaotic. One of the very few things that actually really got on my nerves though, was Beast after he changes into Beast form. With all the special effects which are very convincing, I couldn’t understand why Nicholas Hoult looked like he was wearing a child’s rubber Halloween mask and costume. It was thoroughly disappointing, and you would think that with all the money they put into special effects in this film they would be able to improve it a little, but no. I didn’t think I’d have to say this, but in this respect The Last Stand actually beats this, insofar as Kelsey Grammer’s Beast was a lot more realistic.

Basically, to sum up, despite it’s teeny tiny flaws, the film is brilliant, and it’s absolutely refreshing to see an X-Men film that is actually worth watching, repeatedly. The new cast and director (Matthew Vaughn, Stardust, Kick-Ass) are exactly what the franchise needed to pick itself up after the shambles of The Last Stand and the hideous Wolverine prequel. This earns my first five star review.

*****

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrbHykKUfTM

Pirates Of Anywhere But The Caribbean: On Stranger Plotlines

Well what the hell was that?

Here is where I would usually put a summary of the plot, but to be honest I don't really know what it is. Cap'n Jack's back doing what he does best: screaming, jumping around rooms, doing that weird jerky thing and embarking on a quest for something mystical. All standard. What I don't understand is anything else. I thought it couldn't get any worse than the third one, but at least that had a purpose, even if it was a jumbled pile of meaningless plot. This one seems to exist just for the fact that they wanted a sequel, and it appears that they threw together a script in about 28 minutes.

There's firstly the setting. As you probably deduced from the title, they don't go anywhere in the Caribbean, defeating the whole title of the franchise; basically, they go on a jaunt of western Europe. Actually, not even that, just Spain and London. Which was my first niggle. There was never any explanation as to the fact they were casually in England in the first place.

Then there's said quest. I didn't understand it. Other than the feared Blackbeard, nobody seemed to have any motive to find the Fountain of Youth other than "well he's looking for it, so I might as well too". Not a reason. The film seemed to take an overly long time to establish the plotline, and Blackbeard, who's supposedly the main antagonist in the film, doesn't appear until a good 45 minutes in. Even then his appearance leaves you with more questions than it answers.
If you aren't familiar with the stories of Blackbeard or the Fountain of Youth, basically it will be very hard to understand. I didn't even get why he could magically control his ship standing still, just with a few hand gestures (it actually made us think "why does he even have a crew if he can man the ship himself without any effort?). And the whole search for the Fountain of Youth doesn't even make sense: Blackbeard wants to find it so that he won't die in the next two weeks, as has been prophecised, but the Fountain doesn't give immortality, so it seems kind of redundant. Basically, the whole quest seems to be there just to give the characters something to do instead of getting drunk and sleeping with prostitutes, which actually would have made for a more entertaining film.
I don't like any of the new characters, really. Penelope Cruz was useless and there was absolutely no chemistry between her and Depp. The only thing that was amusing was the Spanish music that played every time she was on screen, in case we hadn't deduced her nationality from her accent. Then there's Sam Claflin and Astrid Berges-Frisbey (stupid name), slated as the new Orlando and Keira, who were so unbelievably one-dimentional all I could do was laugh at the absurdity of their supposed romance. He was pathetic and needed to man up, and he was also ridiculously flaily for no apparent reason, whereas she was a mermaid-when-in-water-but-a-woman-on-land who just seemed to have one facial expression (mildly worried) and had a total of about 3 lines in the whole film. We were only entertained by them because of their ridiculousness, and they were actually one of the most entertaining aspects of the film... if you laugh at and ridicule them the whole way though.

There are also so many plot holes. The actual Fountain is never really explained, and when the unnecessary Spanish (who we are lead to believe for most of the film are more redundant enemies) come to destroy it, they don't do a very good job. There is one mention of zombies in the entire film (apologies to those who got excited about that from the trailer) and then they are never addressed again, and no explanation is given over that either. Basically, like I said, many questions are raised and almost none of them are answered, which is one of the reasons you will come out feeling immensly dissatisfied.

One thing I have to give credit for is the action sequences. Well, most of them. The first sword-fighting scene between Jack and Cruz's character Anjelica went on for far too long, and was slightly reminiscent of his first one with Orlando, which, instead of being pleasantly nostaligic, seemed like they couldn't be bothered to come up with new choreography. Other than that, though, they were quite entertaining. My favourite would have to be the one where the mermaids basically completely overpower a shipfull of men, though I didn't understand why they resembled vampires. But anyway. The others were pretty much standard: all stylised, all predictable, but fun to watch.

Basically, to sum up, this film had no purpose. It didn't even feel like a Pirates film, as only three of the original characters are actually in it; even with the iconic music playing and Depp's crazy Jack Sparrow, this film just didn't feel the same. Yes, it was shorter than the third one (though it doesn't feel like it), but there was just no point to it. I think the best bit of the whole film was when Barbossa declares right at the end that they are going to Tortuga, the legendary pirate port that brought so much fun to the first films - we cheered at this. And then we don't see it.

My friend and I were talking the other day about how hard it must be to promote a film when you know how bad it is, and I felt particularly sorry for Geoffrey Rush. Considering the last film he appeared in won 4 Oscars and he was nominated for one (The King's Speech, in case you've been living under a rock), I don't know how he can put his name on this film and not feel ashamed. Even Johnny, who by now must be getting tired of the same act (I know I am - Jack Sparrow just doesn't have the same fun quality it once did and is getting a little old), is surely bored of the whole thing and should really stop before this is what he becomes most remembered for instead of the great actor he actually is but cannot show in these films. It has gotten to the stage where Depp has to carry the films by himself, and now he struggles. Even his disintegrating charm and wit cannot make it acceptable.

Verdict: I wouldn't waste money going to the cinema to see it. Wait until it's on television, and even then make sure you watch with a couple of friends, like I did, so that you can laugh and mock it instead of turning off. I hope to God this is where it ends, though based on the fact it's still quite a money-spinner, I'm guessing it's not. This franchise is one which has well and truly crashed and burned.

** (and that's because I was feeling generous)

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5AqJww06bw
Kathryn (who came with me to see this muck) and I were discussing how there should be an Oscar for best trailer, and we think that this should definitely be up for it. But don't be deceived by the brilliance of it - it showcases the highlights of the film well, but then the promise of a good film is by no means delivered.

The Sports Fairytale

At the weekend, Cinderella Man was broadcast, and since I hadn’t seen it but had heard good reviews about it, I decided to sit down and give it a go. Needless to say, I seem to be developing a taste for boxing films (The Fighter, Rocky) and Depression-era films (Water for Elephants), so having both sounds like a winning formula. And suffice to say, I wasn’t disappointed.

Cinderella Man is the true story of boxer James J Braddock, a fighter in Depression-era Jersey who, after failing in his sports career first time around, is given a second chance to escape the breadlines and labour at the docks and to support his family, fighting his way back up to the top. It’s essentially a feel-good story, and I understand why so many people have been inspired by his rags-to-riches tale.

Firstly, I have to say that yes, it is a boxing film, but like many boxing films out there that isn't what it's all about. This is the story of one man trying to overcome financial hardships and provide for his family, with themes of loyalty, lifelong bonds and suffering. Of course there is boxing in it: I'm not a fan of the sport in real-life, but in films it always seems to have so much more emotion because you understand the backstory for their involvement, rather than just observing people punch the crap out of each other. That is essentially what this film is - the boxing merely provides a backdrop for a story which inspired many and truly touches people, both then and now.

Now, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from Russell Crowe in the main role: for one, I haven’t really seen him shine as an actor before, and this didn’t seem like the type of role where he would excel. He doesn't look like a boxer, and he doesn't really seem like someone who can fully pull off the domestic husband role; I have to say though that I was impressed with the balance he gave to it, portraying both a family man and determined sportsman with an impressive level of emotion. He surprised me in a very good way, and it's a shame that he can't be more consistently good in other roles that can be as strong as this one.

Renee Zellweger, for me, lets the film down. I am never really impressed with her acting, and this role didn’t really change that opinion of her. I could see her trying to convey emotion, but it failed, essentially. She was wooden and not that believable as a woman who makes the unbelievably hard choice of sending her children away so that they can actually eat, or as someone whose husband fights murderous boxers for a living. Towards the end of the film, I thought her performance was over the top in such a way that made her look ridiculous and, in fact, like a petulant toddler. In another actress’ hands, I could see this role being portrayed a lot better; it certainly calls for an actress better suited for dramatic roles, and her casting is one of the only criticisms I have.

The highlight of the film for me was Paul Giamatti. I really respect him as an actor anyway, and he was Oscar-nominated for this, which he completely deserved. He held the film together as James’ long-time trainer, Joe Gould, whose dedication to James is heartfelt. It’s a demonstration of bromance and loyalty at its most emotional. One scene which shows the real state of his home life was heartbreaking, and shows the reality of just how many people were affected by the Depression. He plays Joe in such a dry way, but made me laugh many times throughout whilst also bringing an intense vulnerability to the character. The chemistry he and Crowe had was surprisingly good, and I really believed that they had this long-standing bond and understood the relationship between them.

Other aspects supported the film too. Ron Howard (Apollo 13, Frost/Nixon) was directing, so obviously it wasn't going to be disastrous by any means, but he uses some very clever cinematography to show various different aspects of the film - one technique I liked was the flash of x-ray when a particularly brutal punch was delivered in the ring, implying serious injury, or the various motion techniques that highlighted certain aspects. The music also added effectively to the drama. Thomas Newman (The Shawshank Redemption, The Lost Boys and frequent Pixar contributor) uses gorgeous instrumentals to really emphasise the emotion of the scene, or to build tension - I especially liked the climactic music which really supports the mood of the audience.

Overall, a film I would definitely recommend to anyone who likes action and drama films, or period films, or biopics... pretty much anyone. Catch it if you can. The performances, for the most part, are strong and the story is an inspirational one which will stay with you for a long time.

Verdict: Somewhat predictable, even if you don’t know the story before watching it, but inspirational, heartfelt and emotional. Strong performances lead this film, and even if boxing isn’t your thing, give it a go and get involved in the story of one man just trying to gain a better future for his family.

****

Watch today or tomorrow on iPlayer (I watched it twice in three days I liked it so much): http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00dcq8h/Cinderella_Man/

A Look At Upcoming Films: 2011

A Total Film Twitter post yesterday asked followers to name their best movie year and the films in it. This opened the floodgates of people posting 1985 (arguably one of the best, as frequent contributor Kathryn would defend - Back to the Future, The Breakfast Club, St Elmo's Fire etc.), 1999 (Fight Club, The Sixth Sense, Toy Story 2) and more. But Kathryn and I posted two different ones. I said 2011, which has already thrown up some amazing movies (The Fighter, True Grit, Water for Elephants among many), but has the promise of many more to come. And Kathryn posted 2012, which has so many films coming out that are must-see that I am already saving up (keep your eyes peeled for my post about 2012 coming soon).

Firstly, just around the corner (literally just), is the highly-anticipated X-Men: First Class. I am so unbelievably excited for this film I do a little happy dance in my head every time I think about it. After the shambles of X-Men: The Last Stand and the atrocious Wolverine, I cannot wait for this reboot that promises plenty of action, stellar performances (though I’m not too thrilled about the women involved – Jennifer Lawrence, Rose Byrne and January Jones – but we shall see) and amazing special effects. From what I’ve seen, which as I have complained about before, is far too much before the film has even been released, it looks like just the kick the franchise needs. And I am happy about Matthew Vaughn helming it, I think he’ll do a great job. And it also doesn’t hurt that James McAvoy is in it. It looks like him and Michael Fassbender have amazing chemistry going on - I sense bromance. My review for this will come at some point next week when I finally get to see it. Expect much praise already.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrbHykKUfTM

Of course, the most hyped-up film of the year has to be the final instalment of the Harry Potter franchise (sob). Having grown up with Harry, I am going to be so depressed to see it end. Yes, it’s had its ups and downs (I won’t get into the debate of the best and worst ones) but overall there isn’t one person who has seen it and can deny that they have been entertained. For anyone who’s read the books (and if you haven’t then you are not a fan. You’re not.), you know what’s to come and what a tear-fest it will surely be – there are at least three deaths that I’m hoping are going to make me cry or I’m going to be disappointed. As I’m planning on going to the premiere/midnight screening/multiple viewings, I cannot wait for the film to get here, but at the same time I don’t want it to end. It will be a bittersweet goodbye.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mObK5XD8udk

There’s also the gloriously titled Cowboys and Aliens to look forward to - even that title alone should make you want to see this. The cast and crew are an action-movie fan's ultimate dream: the delicious Daniel Craig, the always entertaining Harrison Ford, Jon Favreau (Iron Man) directing, and the brainchild of the great Steven Spielberg. It sounds amazing, and from the trailers it looks like it’s going to be one of my favourite films of the year. It's so original and I love that in the current theme of book-to-film adaptations and sequels/prequels we have something new and exciting.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJixNxFxhT4

And then there’s Captain America: The First Avenger. Continuing with the onslaught of superhero films, this is one which is relatively original in Hollywood. I’m excited to see Chris Evans in a role which I think will actually suit him (he was the best part of Fantastic Four, another superhero film which puts him in good stead for this one), and the trailers look impressive. I like the whole background and setting (weedy man rejected as a soldier takes super-serum in WWII to become the buffed-up First Avenger) and the whole premise of it. It definitely looks like an original, great movie to see, and I’m excited to see what they do with it with such a blank canvas. And of course, it has to be good to set up the Avengers film.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy6CCuw7pxI

One of the films I'm really hoping is going to be good - like awards-nominated good - is the adaptation of On the Road. Merely from pictures I've seen, it looks impressive. I'm starting to get annoyed with it because they filmed it nearly a year ago and there's still no word on a release date; I've only read today that it's put in a submission to be screened at the Venice Film Festival, which still doesn't really tell us anything. Still, I have high expectations for this. It has a good cast - Sam Riley (Brighton Rock), Garrett Hedlund (TRON: Legacy - one of Kathryn and my favourite actors at the moment) Kristen Stewart (Twilight - people need to stop judging her, she's a very good actress. Watch Adventureland, Panic Room or Welcome to the Rileys if you don't believe me) and Viggo Mortensen (LOTR and many a Cronenberg film), among other high-profile actors, and the production already looks amazing. I can't wait for a trailer, and the release.

I'll end with Crazy, Stupid, Love. Not something I'd usually be interested in or recommend, but I've seen the trailer many times now and every time I see it I still laugh at points. Steve Carell has so far only impressed me in one film (Little Miss Sunshine) but with support from Julianne Moore and Ryan Gosling he looks like he could actually be very entertaining in this. The whole premise sounds corny, but generally it looks very enjoyable, with laughs aplenty and a nice feel-good vibe about it. I look forward to its release. It's something a little different for my usual taste of action, but I have high hopes for this.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDLhjm-0rJQ

I could go on with 2011, but this is already a long post and I haven’t even gotten started on 2012, so I’ll just list the upcoming films that everyone should see: Green Lantern, The Three Muskateers, Jane Eyre, Immortals, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, Fright Night, Rise of the Planet of the Apes to name a few. I'm sure I've missed some, but I'll keep everyone up to date.

Happy cinema-going! Look out for 2012 soon.

Lourdes: Why?

Over several weeks we have been forced to sit through the absolutely ridiculous film known as Lourdes. I'm sure you can tell just from the tone of that first sentence how this review is going to go...

This French film follows a woman suffering from severe multiple sclerosis searching for a miracle that will cure her of her delibitating condition, and the effects on the people around her when it supposedly happens.

That all sounds fine, on paper. Dull, but acceptable. Not on film. At 96 minutes, it's relatively short as far as films go. but it felt mind-numbingly long. They could have quite easily have cut about 25 minutes of footage where the main character merely stares ahead, and nothing else happens. There are long periods of the film where literally nothing happens, and we are just watching characters sitting around waiting for something. There are chunks of the film where there isn't even any annoying French dialogue, which would have at least given us subtitles to read.

From what I gathered, they tried to put a little of everything in there: we have comedy, with the morally-corrupt volunteer girls working there, sleeping their way around the married men; romance, where some random man that the main character knows from previous pilgrimages (though he doesn't remember her, clearly, in another unintentionally funny moment) suddenly takes an interest in her when she can walk again.

There's also the religious aspect of it. Yes, there was obviously going to be lots in there, but I really don't appreciate having the Catholic faith shoved down my throat. Watching the film made it seem even more like a cult than it already is. It just seemed ridiculous throughout, and the film actually didn't present it in a very good light, making it seem as though they had no idea what they were talking about (the answer to most questions raised by the pilgrims seemed to be "God works in mysterious ways" - not a real answer!).

To be honest, I laughed through most of the film - if I hadn't, I'd have cried at the appalling film-making. There was never an explanation given for the mute old woman who was just randomly there all the time, and that just made her appearances even more hilarious, as she turned up at the most inopportune moments (she follows the would-be couple up a mountain for some reason as they're about to get it on) or wheeled the main character around with no explanation given. The slag volunteer provided endless entertainment, though she was incredibly irritating, especially towards the end with her attempt at singing.

The ending was incredibly annoying - the main character falls over while dancing and then everyone questions whether she is actually the recipient of a miracle, or if it was brief respite from her condition. Then she sits down, is filmed for another five minutes doing nothing but watching the rest of the people at the function dancing, and then it ends. I am not a fan of ambiguous endings usually - I like to be told what's happened, otherwise it's not fully satisfying. But this was particularly bad, because it wasn't even that ambiguous. So she tripped over and then sat down - that is cause for people to gossip over her condition? I didn't understand. And her new man ran off like a shot as soon as she fell, not to be seen again. That was funny. But other than that, awful.

All in all, I don't really understand how this won any critical acclaim, even if it was just in France. It even won the Vienna Film Festival's Best Film prize! They can be sure that I will never be attending that festival if that's the best film there.

Verdict: Basically, don't waste your time. It takes more effort to read the film and understand it than it's worth, and essentially I feel like it's taken away about 30 hours I will never get back.

*

The 80s Film That Time Forgot

Once again, thanks to my contributor Kathryn! And everyone should see this film by the way. You must. Your life is incomplete without it.

The 80’s film that time forgot

Mannequin (1987)

Director: Michael Gottlieb

Starring: Andrew McCarthy, Kim Catrall, James Spader

An out of work sculptor falls in love with a mannequin. Seriously, what more could you want from a film?

Jonathan Switcher (McCarthy) gets fired from every job he attempts but when he sees a mannequin in a shop window that he previously made whilst working at a factory  his life changes forever. After inadvertently saving the life of the store owner he manages to get a job at there as a window dresser and seems to develop an unhealthy attachment to his creation. Then, as luck would have it, Switcher is saved from looking like a total pervert when his mannequin comes to life. But there’s a catch – he’s the only one who can see her in her non-mannequin form. Hilarity ensues.

What really makes this film so enjoyable is the support cast. James Spader (Pretty in Pink) is magnificent as Switcher's slimy boss who is in league with a rival department store, as is G. W Malley (Police Academy) as Spader’s security guard minion whilst Meshach Taylor is a store employee named Hollywood who seems to accept Switcher's mannequin loving ways rather too quickly. In fact, with everything that’s going on in the film it soon becomes easy to ignore the plot holes and Catrall’s acting. There’s even a montage of outfit changes!  In my opinion, one of the best films of the decade: Mannequin is unforgettable.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6gpndlepiM

And good news.... there’s a Mannequin 2.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1oy_TQ9tyE

Random Film Ranting

Just a couple of quick things to say generally.

I watched the NMAs the other day. I have to say, of all the film awards ceremonies I've seen this year (and there have been a lot), this is by far the worst one. If the most high-profile actor there is Ed Westwick, that tells you something about the calibre of the show. Oh, except Gwyneth Paltrow who randomly turned up for no reason I can fathom in a dress that left very little to the imagination. Hello, deluded NMA organisers, hardly anyone turned up for the BAFTAs! Why do you think they will turn up to your quite frankly awful knock-off three months later? The highlight was a five minute montage where Johnny Depp (who I also share a birthday with!) was awarded Screen Icon. That was it. And he wasn't even there.

As usual this year, all the awards were mind-numbingly predictable (The King's Speech and Harry Potter, anyone?), all except for the One to Watch prize, a cheap rip-off of BAFTA's Rising Star Award, which went to Jamie Campbell Bower, who of all the films I've seen him in hasn't really demonstrated any kind of notable acting ability. How he won over the likes of Tom Hardy and Andrew Garfield I will never know.

And don't even get me started on Christine Bleakley. I fail to see what relevance she has to the world of films, and she was just very irritating the whole way through. I may be biased because I hate her anyway, but she did such an appalling job it made me want to cry. And I don't understand why there were only nine awards, and only Performance of the Year instead of Best Actor/Actress? Basically everyone knew that Colin Firth was going to win that. Why did they even bother putting other people into the category?

All in all, a waste of two hours of my life. That's enough time to watch a film in.

On another note, I watched An Education tonight. I thought it was high time I watched it, based on all the praise I've heard, but from what I can gather from my one view of it, it was incredibly overrated and bordering on dull. I can understand why people like it, if they like that understated, pretentious thing, but in my opinion the best thing about it was Carey Mulligan (who I'm starting to get slightly concerned about - diversify please!), who deserved her nominations at least last year, though I still reserve judgement on whether she actually deserved the BAFTA over her fellow nominees. The rest of the film was too irritating, and frankly a little creepy.

Again, another hour and a half I won't ever get back.

Just another quick thing: I'm starting to get a little annoyed about the amount of footage I'm seeing of X-Men: First Class. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely cannot wait for this film, but I feel like I'm seeing too much of it and it's ruining the anticipation a little. Matthew Vaughn and Marvel Studios, stop releasing stuff, please. It's only another couple of weeks until we can all see the whole film in its entirity.

Finally, just to inform you, I'm going to see Water For Elephants for a fourth time tomorrow. I think that should give you all some kind of indication on how much I love that film already. Go and see it if you haven't, you are really missing out. And bring a tissue.

P.S. It is the wonderful Robert Pattinson's birthday today. Just saying.