*DVD Review*
AWAKE
Directed by Joby Harold
Actors Hayden Christensen, Jessica Alba and Terrence Howard
Length 84 min
Special Features Behind the scenes footage, cast and crew interviews
Released Date 25th August 2008

With its corny, statistic-based tagline and blander-than-bland cast, ‘Awake’ looked like a complete no-brainer. However, look beyond the cover and you’ll find an enjoyable little thriller that packs some surprising twists. If you don’t want them spoiled, I’d suggest you come back to this review at a later date.

For those of you still with me, the film spins off from the very real phenomenon known as ‘anaesthetic awareness’, where patients find themselves conscious and able to feel pain during operations – but paralysed and unable to alert the surgeons. When a rich tycoon experiences this, matters are made even worse when he overhears the surgeons plotting his murder.

From the outset ‘Awake’ didn’t look promising. The lead actors, for a start, filled me with dread. Lead actor Hayden Christensen was wooden in the ‘Star Wars’ prequels and his co-star Jessica Alba has been bland in everything she’s ever appeared in. Predictably, there are no stand-out performances in this film. However, far from being detrimental, the casting actually worked to lead me into a false sense of smugness, so that when the big twist occurred around the half way mark, it really took me by surprise. Then, while I was thinking that must be all, it confidently pulled off another twist that wrapped the film up without leaving me feeling cheated. Far from the kind of tacked-on, final reel twists common in movies nowadays, here they felt organic and logical.

Staying with the casting, ‘Awake’ is a film all about inverting stereotypes and playing off actor associations. The bland but cute wife? Grand conspirator. The stern, overbearing mother? Self-sacrificing. The nice surgeon played by Fisher ‘Short Circuit’ Stevens? Murderer. Inept, drunk anaesthetist Michael Macdonald (Adam Sandler’s nemesis in ‘Happy Gilmore’)? Genuinely nice. Who’d have thought it?

However, despite the surprising twists, ‘Awake’ never really excels to the level of top-notch thriller, falling short of recent high-concept suspense stories like ‘Panic Room’ and ‘Collateral’. In a perfect world, this film would have been made by Alfred Hitchcock in the 1950s with James Stewart and Grace Kelly as the leads. It has just the kind of macabre plot that Hitchcock revelled in, and with the limited cast and sets, he really could have done something special with it. Had it been shot now on a shoestring budget with no-name actors, I’m sure ‘Awake’ would have been hailed as a great achievement. However, as it is, the film is doomed to be forgotten as another not-bad Hollywood thriller. I can’t help thinking it deserves more. AW

*DVD Review*
UNEARTHED
Directed by Matthew Leutwyler
Actors Emmanuelle Vaugier and Luke Goss
Length 89 min
Special Features Behind the scenes footage, cast and crew interviews
Released Date 18th August 2008

In my mind there are only three types of acceptable horror movie – the outstanding, the enjoyable and the so-bad-it’s-good.  ‘Unearthed’ is none of these, choosing instead to fill the category of bland horror – a level that makes up the majority of recent output and has pretty much put this fright fan off a genre he has cherished for years.

Where to start…

The ‘plot’ is so by-the-numbers straight-to-DVD horror that I dreamt up an I-Spy game to stop myself falling asleep.  Small Nevada town cut off by a mysterious accident?  Tick.  Law-enforcer troubled by a past tragedy?  Tick.  Monster awoken from its ancient slumber?  Tick.  And that’s only the beginning.  Throw in a cliché’d wise-ass black guy, a wise Native American and an amateur scientist-cum-walking-exposition and my book has got ticks all over it.

If the script is bland, the direction is just awful.  As if deliberately trying to anger me back to consciousness, 99.9% of this film takes place in pitch black, meaning that despite the perfunctory storyline, you have absolutely no idea what is going on.  Whenever you manage to focus properly, the camera whips around to something else.  Could they not afford tripods?  To make matters worse, the director is another of these modern horror auteurs who are contractually obliged to pepper their films with random jerky edits and musical stings in an attempt to create suspense and uneasiness.  For their information, it does not work.  Far from making me uneasy, it just irritated me.  It was just this sort of thing that put me off the original ‘Saw’ and as a result any other horror fair released in the past four years.

The monster, as you can guess, is neither seen clearly nor explained properly and as a result I lost interest very quickly.  From what I could see it looked like your usual ‘Alien’ rip-off – all tails, claws and extendable teeth.  To be honest, I spent more time wondering what kind of accent Luke Goss was supposed to be talking in (American or British?) and whether the filmmakers were really making out he was of Native American descent.

There have always been two different types of Stephen King movies – the dramas and the horrors.  Examples of the former – such as ‘Stand By Me’, ‘Misery’ and ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ – have always been more successful than the often dreadful attempts at the latter.  Ever seen ‘Graveyard Shift’, ‘The Mangler’ or ‘The Langoliers’?  Trust me, I wouldn’t bother.

The current attempt at adapting King’s work, however, cleverly combines the two types to form a movie that satisfies on both fronts.  In ‘The Mist’, a wild storm brings with it a strange fog that engulfs a New England supermarket, trapping the frightened inhabitants within as strange creatures surround them, hungry for human flesh.  As days pass and their numbers dwindle, mass panic and religious propaganda threaten the survivors in a way that the monsters never could.

As stated, the movie has two distinct strands – the supernatural horror outside the supermarket and the human horror within.  Both are played out nicely, complimenting each other and ensuring the tension is kept high throughout.  The human monsters, in particular the religious zealot-cum-prophet Mrs. Carmody, are actually scarier than anything the special effects team can throw at us.  And I mean that as the highest compliment.

The script, acting and documentary-style direction all work wonderfully to lift the concept from b-movie heaven to believable thriller.  The special effects, while prominent whenever the monsters appear, never rub the CGI in your face like so many horror movies do nowadays.  The creature design, ever a bugbear of mine, is generally fantastic, mixing HP Lovecraft, palaeontology and natural history to create something at once otherworldly and believable.

Just as the pre-publicity would have it, ‘The Mist’ can truly be labelled a call-back to the glorious hard-as-nails horror movies of the late 70s and early 80s.  ‘The Thing’ and ‘Night of The Living Dead’ are just some of the titles that the film evokes.  A few times, it even reminded me of a kind of adult ‘Jumanji’.

It is both a compliment and a criticism to say that the movie is bleak.  And I do not use that word lightly.  While the nihilistic tone pleasingly keeps the film in the vein of its predecessors (without chickening out with a safe conclusion), after investing your time and emotions in the characters and their plight, you can’t help but walk away with a nasty taste in your mouth.

However, as a fan of Stephen King and a particular fan of the original novella, I was more than pleased to find that Frank Darabont had crafted a real horror movie – of the kind that I adored as a kid and still cherish to this day.  With ‘The Shawshank Redemption’, ‘The Green Mile’ and now this, Frank Darabont is yet to put a foot wrong in the King adaptation stakes. AW

To read a question and answer session with Stephen King and director Frank Darabront click here

The Happening is slow paced thriller about a group of New Yorkers frantically trying to avoid a mysterious natural disaster. The sweeping epidemic is picking off humans one by one and nobody has clue why…

Think of The Happening as an eager 9-year-old boy running the 100-metre sprint.
He starts with a burst of energy and uses his pace to obtain a healthy start. However, by 30 metres into the race his speed has halved and energy levels have dropped forcing him to jogging pace. By 60 metres he is relying on the momentum from his explosive start to push his tired legs past the finish line. As the 100-metre marker approaches the idea of the perfect performance has faded away, leaving only a glimpse of brilliance and a promise of something great.

The title role is filled by Mark Wahlberg, who puts in a professional stint as high school Science Teacher. Apart from the morbidly spectacular opening 15 minutes Wahlberg is one of the positive reasons to see this movie. He manages to subtly give his character a comedic edge while simultaneously portraying anguish and desperation.

Continuing the trend of director / composer partnerships Shymalan has again employed the services of James Howard Newton. His score like Walhberg stands out and shows why high calibre scripts are landing on his desk (The Dark Knight, I Am Legend and King Kong to name a few).

After wasting two hours of my life watching ‘Lady in the Water’ I was little concerned about M. Night Shyamalan’s latest effort. I have been fond of his work since his groundbreaking head turner back in 1999 and couldn’t resist the trip to the cinema to see his latest box office release. Plus I really really really wanted him to return with a movie of equal greatness and be there to witness every frame on the silver screen. Sadly though it’s looking more and more likely that his work will never top or surpass The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable.

A new Indy movie was doomed to disappoint from its very conception. The ‘Indiana Jones’ series holds a place in the hearts of every discerning moviegoer and a poor sequel would spell disaster for the credibility of its creators and besmirch the good name of the originals. The good news is that ‘Crystal Skull’ is not a complete failure. In fact, it was, on the whole, an enjoyable yarn.

The cast was excellent. Harrison Ford slipped back into the fedora with grace, and his insistence on doing his own stunts really lent the action an authenticity it could easily have lacked. Ray Winstone, John Hurt and Jim Broadbent gave the production a British touch that recalled Denholm Elliott, Paul Freeman and John Rhys-Davies. The still gorgeous Karen Allen made a welcome return as Marion Ravenwood. Cate Blanchett provided a memorable villain who was very much in keeping with those of the previous movies. Even Shia LaBeouf didn’t embarrass the franchise, as many feared he would.

At times the film even managed to recreate the distinctive feel of the earlier movies – especially during the numerous chase scenes. The deadly army ants were grisly fun, bringing an edge of horror to what could easily have been a lightweight romp.

As a fan, however, I couldn’t help but be disappointed. For one, the tone was all over the place. The over-the-top fridge escape and vine-swinging sequences, while entertaining, obliterated the heightened reality of the originals in favour of something akin to those godawful ‘Mummy’ films. To make matters worse, the film ends with not only a cheesy wedding and clapping sequence (seriously - who claps at a wedding?), but a truly toe-curling moment with Mutt and Indy’s fedora that threatens to dump an unwanted spin-off on us. The ‘Indiana Jones’ franchise is a much classier act than that and Spielberg and Lucas should have known it.

The extensive pre-publicity had painted the movie as a strictly back-to-basics approach to the series, forgoing CGI for old-school effects in an attempt to capture the timeless quality of the originals. Sadly, this couldn’t have been further from the truth. Any hint of earthy realism was completely lost as the final third of the movie drowned in the eye-bleeding CGI that afflicts every Hollywood blockbuster nowadays. Aliens, a giant spaceship, the destruction of a Mayan temple. Was this all completely necessary?

It certainly wasn’t in keeping with the previous films. Yes, they were pulp yarns, but importantly they felt real. All ‘Raiders’ had was one short supernatural sequence at the end. ‘Temple Of Doom’ lacked almost any in-your-face effects that I can remember, relying more on sinister atmosphere and impressive set design. And what did ‘The Last Crusade’ have? An invisible bridge, an old knight and a guy that ages really quickly. Not exactly ‘Star Wars’ was it? In an age where movies such as the ‘Bourne’ series and ‘Casino Royale’ buck over-the-top Hollywood excess in favour of a more sophisticated approach, I would have hoped for so much better from my beloved franchise. Even the title feels too long and tricky to roll off the tongue. What would have been wrong with just ‘Indiana Jones And The Crystal Skull’? Not over-the-top enough?

Criticisms aside (and there are many), it is almost impossible for me to truly hate an Indiana Jones movie – no matter how hard I try. As a result, I honestly enjoyed this long-awaited offering, as I’m sure millions of others will too. More movies will probably be made as a result of this, but, unfortunately, I am not entirely sure if the Indiana Jones franchise is one I want to see continue. AW

To cap this year’s AV Festival off, the Tyneside played host to what was publicized as an evening of the very best in British broadcasting.  I was interested to see how they would pull this off.

It was billed as an ‘alternative’ compilation to the kind of ‘Best Of’ shows that litter the TV listings at present.  However, it was voted for by the general public – who are surely the mainstream, are they not?  As result, you would have expected the finalists to be the same old shows you’ve seen covered a million times before.  It has to be said, however, that the final twelve threw up a number of surprises.  They ranged from the worthy (‘The Blue Planet’, ‘The Power Of Nightmares’), to the populist (‘The Office’, ‘Shameless’, ‘Peep Show’) and the cult (‘Red Dwarf’, ‘The Prisoner’), taking in some contemporary dramas like ‘Queer As Folk’ and ‘The Buddha Of Suburbia’.  Complimenting the choices, local presenter and DJ Ingrid Hagemann chaired the evening with aplomb, giving the gala a sense of professionalism that covered over any technical hiccups that occurred and kept the night moving along smoothly.

However, the main problem I had with this evening’s theme was that compilation shows are like wallpaper television – you can have them on in the background while you do something more important.  What’s more, you can discuss and argue about the choices shown to your heart’s content when you are in the comfort of your own home – in a cinema, you are forced to sit there and listen.  Which means those giving their opinions have to be able to hold your attention.  While an interesting blend of media types, the panellists featured failed to represent the public as a whole.  Of the eight, only one was a woman and most were over 40.  All of them were white.  Furthermore, of the shows that made it into the Top 12, only a handful were mentioned outside of the initial batch of clips.  It would have been nice to have heard a bit about each of them individually instead of having ‘The Office’ batted back and forth like the ‘in thing’ it was (in 2001).

In execution, the evening didn’t seem to know what it wanted to be.  It wasn’t informative enough to be educational, but it didn’t hold your attention enough to be mere entertainment.  As with the ‘Doctor Who’ special, I also had a problem with the screening time.  Late evening is no time for sitting listening to an informed discussion.  If the event had been a full-blown populist extravaganza, then it would have been a perfect evening’s entertainment – but it also wouldn’t have been worthy of placing within the AV Festival line-up.

As for the show voted the winner, ‘The Blue Planet’ cropped up a lot in the early discussions and so it wasn’t a complete surprise when it was announced number one (although I was sure it was going to be ‘The Office’ by the way everybody kept talking about it).  On the big screen, ‘The Blue Planet’ was, of course, superb.  It would take the most cynical soul not to be wowed by the kind of visuals on show.  However, by the time the documentary was screened, I would have preferred something a little faster paced (not that the AV Festival could be blamed for public opinion, of course).

As part of this year’s AV Festival and under its theme of ‘broadcast’, the Tyneside played host to an evening dedicated to the good Doctor.  This consisted of a big-screen showing of the recent two-parter “The Sound of Drums”/”Last Of The Time Lords” and a Q&A with Dick Mills – sound designer at the BBC’s legendary Radiophonic Workshop.

The choice of episodes made perfect sense on paper.  The climactic season 3 two-parter was fast-paced and cinematic – perfect for viewing on the big screen.  It was truly a delight to watch John Simm’s off-the-wall performance as The Master again.  However, the episodes also exposed the worst traits of New Who.  Present was the inappropriate use of pop music that has dogged the rejuvenated series (Rogue Trader’s horrendous ‘Voodoo Child’ got an airing only because it tied into the title of the episode).  Noticeable was the occasionally awful dialogue that dragged the series down from high-quality fantasy to a bad episode of ‘Hollyoaks’.  And the less said about those misguided Doctor/Jesus parallels the better.  There were so many better episodes to choose from, of course.  The previous two-parter “Human Nature”/”The Family Of Blood” was superb and the solo effort “Blink” is arguably the best New Who (if not modern telefantasy) to date.  Plus, a scary episode would have tied in much better with Dick Mills’ sinister music work on the early series.

Which leads me to the curious choice of guest.  Why pick a behind-the-scenes icon of early Who (not to mention early BBC broadcasting) when you were going to show two episodes of the new series?  This was especially odd considering the director of the very episodes shown was at the festival two days earlier introducing a Doctor Who movie he had to hand in.  This is not to say that Dick Mills was a poor guest – far from it.  He was witty and informative.  I would have loved to have heard more from him.  However, when utilising such a guest, wouldn’t it have been more suitable to show a retrospective of clips from the series as a whole?  Or compare episodes of the early series and the new?  Anything rather than leave the guest answering a lot of questions about a series he had no hand in.

What was more, the timing was all off.  This kind of event would have been much more suitable between 6 and 8pm, rather than 8.30 and 10.30pm.  I would have been fascinated to have learned more from Dick Mills about the making of early BBC serials like ‘Doctor Who’ and ‘Quatermass’ (not to mention his work on the ‘Goons’) – but not at 10 o’clock at night.  No-one wants to take part in a Q&A at 10 o’clock at night.  Why then put the Q&A on after the screening?  No-one is going to walk out near the end of the screening, but plenty will (and did) walk out of the Q&A.

The Tyneside Cinema continued their ongoing series of classic film screenings with this fantastic Ealing black comedy.

For the few of you who haven’t seen ‘The Ladykillers’ (shame on you), the film chronicles the mess that becomes of a ‘perfect’ heist when a gang involves a dotty old lady in their plans.  The cast features a who’s who of 50’s and 60’s character actors including Alec Guinness (channelling Alastair Sim), Peter Sellers, Herbert Lom and a young Frankie Howerd.  The script is witty and sharp and the direction is flawless.  It is almost a perfect film and should be viewed by anyone with a taste for British comedy – if only to extinguish any memory of the Coen Brother’s ill-advised remake.

Traditional screenings of old movies like ‘The Ladykillers’ should be savoured in these DVD and YouTube-centric times.  Going to see a film like this, rather than watching it on television, is very much the difference between going to see a band live over listening to the CD at home – it’s all about The Event and the shared enthusiasm of the audience.

First, I’d like to ask those who hate having films ruined for them to stop reading now.  Don’t worry, there are no great spoilers ahead – rather ‘Cloverfield’ is the kind of movie that is best enjoyed when you don’t know what to expect.  Gone?  Are you sure?  Okay, for the rest of you – here’s the scoop.  It’s good.  Very good, in fact.  Refreshing and engrossing – a big claim for a monster movie.

The story is pleasingly simplistic.  We watch a leaving party unfold via camcorder footage.  Relationships are sketched out and a fumbled love affair is revealed.  Just when you are adjusted to watching someone’s home movie, the tone shifts and suddenly it’s as if you’re watching real-life footage of the 9/11 tragedy.  Only the Statue of Liberty has had its head ripped off and there’s a tentacled monster stomping around Manhattan.  In the midst of all this chaos, a handful of characters regroup and set off on a haphazard rescue mission.

The thinking behind this movie is so obvious and well executed that you wish every studio would take a moment once and a while to really reflect on what they’re doing.  Of course it’s better to show everyday folk than scientists and the military!  Of course we relate better to unknown actors than Hollywood stars!  Of course camcorder footage is more immediate and involving than 35mm!  It seems so obvious now.

That’s not to say that the movie is as mind-bogglingly original as the buzz may have suggested.  It’s the sheer fact that it’s so well done that makes it refreshing and new.  Yes, Spielberg’s ‘War Of The Worlds’ also employed shaky camerawork and a human viewpoint to give a sense of being in the thick of otherworldly action, but this film just did it…well, better.  Sorry Steven.  And it lays waste to the superficially-similar ‘Godzilla’ remake, no worries.  Actually, if ‘Cloverfield’ resembles anything it’s the recent South Korean movie ‘The Host’ which had the scaly monster, desperate rescue plotline and frantic camera style.  Check it out – it’s fantastic.

Back to ‘Cloverfield’, though.  The actors are all universally excellent and more than likely destined for big things.  The script manages to be both naturalistic and well within the tradition of this genre (no mean feat, I’m sure), providing laughs, scares and human tragedy.  Criticisms are minor, but worth noting.  The monster is probably the film’s biggest disappointment.  Like most movie creatures of recent years, it is unimaginative at best – a mess of oddly shaped limbs and CGI tentacles.  The buzz had led me to hope for so much more.  It makes you long for inspired creations like those of ‘Alien’, ‘Predator’ or ‘Tremors’.  Fair play to the filmmakers, though – the creature is kept just out of shot for most of the film – allowing you only sneaky looks while concentrating more on the characters and their plight.  And wisely it is not given a convoluted back story.

My only other criticism (or perhaps observation) is that the film is kind of, well, upsetting.  Most of this is a result of the bleak drama playing out on the screen, true, but it is kind of disturbing to think that the 9/11 tragedy has become so iconic nowadays that you can legitimately make a monster movie about it.  Buildings collapse, smoke and debris fill the air.  Bloody survivors run around clueless and scared, filming events on their cameras.  It only fell short of showing victims hurling themselves desperately out of windows.  I’m all for movies subversively addressing global issues we may not want to confront head-on, but this left me feeling a little uncomfortable.  Or maybe it was just the shaky camerawork leaving me nauseous.  Who knows?

GS picks out some key moments from the 'king of kook' Tim Burton's ongoing career. Burton has been making Hollywood movies for over three decades now, managing to build up From his break through short 'Vincent' to 'Big Fish'.

There is no other director working in cinema today who captures the imagination like him. He continues to defy expectation, whilst managing to entertain with his unique perspective and interpretation of how movies should be made.

Follow this link to have a butchers... 'Click'

For the sixth time Tim Burton returns to the silver screen with his number one muse Johnny Depp in a movie adaptation of Steven Sondheim’s musical Sweeney Todd: Demon Barber of Fleet Street. After Burtons pet project ‘Ripley’s believe it or Not’ folded due to budget restraints he signed on for Sweeney Todd. Never the director to conform to what’s expected, Burton has twisted genres in his bloody tale drawing on and making reference to musicals, comedies (black), horror (Hammer) and tragedies.  Burton has inevitably weaved his trademarks throughout, churning out an extremely visual effort. Not holding anything back, he makes the source material his own and takes a gamble on directing a fully blown horror musical.

Burton’s version can be described as a musical with hint of ‘Oliver’ possessing the personality of ‘American Psycho’. Due to the violent action and graphic throat slitting scenes this is the first Burton movie to receive an 18 rating. Stylistically it is not too dissimilar to  ‘Sleepy Hollow’, and pays homage to the early monster movies Universal Studios once made famous.

Apart from Ed Wood, this is the only Burton movie not to be accompanied by a Danny Elfman score. As it was already an established Broadway hit with music, Elfman was not needed. Sondheim’s musical numbers come thick and fast, just like the blood from Todd’s customer’s jugulars. Each song is finely written and contributes to both story and plot. Die-hard Sondheim fans will find it hard to stomach though, as a bunch of songs have been left out.

When it was confirmed that Johnny Depp had been cast to act and sing as the infamous Sweeney Todd, people naturally started to doubt his credentials as singer. Of course the versatile Mr Depp has again proved the cynics wrong. Not only can he sing, he bends his vocal chords to sound very similar to David Bowie. On top of hitting the right notes and keeping rhythm the acting has to be dealt with almost effortlessly. Depp really lets loose in this role, if he not striking vacant poses and expressing misery via his face, he is ripping the throats out his enemies in pure revenge.

The supporting roles provide some memorable and sinister performances. Burton’s fiancé and mother of his children, Helena Bonham Carter turns in a comedic performance as Mrs Lovett. Although she is a little too pretty for the role, she compliments Depp’s Sweeney and eventually plays a pivotal part in the plot. Sacha Baron Cohen, won his part as Signor Pirelli by singing the entire score of ‘Fiddler on the Roof’ to Tim Burton. He draws on his character acting experience to demonstrate that he pull of any accent convincingly. In fact co-star Johnny Depp has been quoted as saying Cohen is the next Peter Sellers. Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman) and Beadle Bamford (Tim Spall) are essentially the on screen equivalent to Dick Dastardly and Muttely. The gruesome pair are Todd’s adversaries and ultimately responsible for his decline into a vengeful path. Rickman has the sinister deep voice while Spall compliments with his hideous rat like features.

Will Smith and the blockbuster seem to be the perfect cinematic partnership. The scripts that Big Willy chooses to attach his name to inevitably go onto unrivalled box office success. And ‘I am Legend’ hasn’t broke the mould, in fact it has shattered Decembers record for the opening day release, passing the previous record holder ‘The Return of the King’, which opened in December 2003.

Those of you familiar with ‘The Last Man on Earth (1964)’ and ‘The Omega Man (1971)’ will know that ‘I am Legend’ is the third take on Richard Matheson’s novel of the same title. Matheson has been cited as Stephen ‘The’ King’s main creative influence and has spawned countless productions within the Sci-Fi / Horror film and TV genres. Director Francis Lawrence is next up to be influenced and work with Matheson’s fine material. In doing so he is following up his big screen debut ‘Constantine (2005)’ and seems to have effortlessly made the transition from directing pop videos to cinema using his ‘promo’ experience to maximum potential.

Here is a simple plot outline: Dr Robert Neville (Smith) finds himself the last man on earth after a cure for cancer has inadvertently decimated the human race and turned them into ‘Dark Seekers’ aka living zombies with a vampire edge. Just like Danny Boyle’s ‘28 Days later’ (also influenced by Matheson), the bad guys are infected by virus as oppose to being the classic 'living dead' type. Bad news for Neville, the ‘Dark Seekers have a hunger for human flesh and will stop at nothing to pig out on a live human. Now that’s about all I can tell you plot wise, as the story would be spoilt if I went into further details.

The Golden Compass is a story about Lyra Belacqua (Dakota Blue Richards) and her journey to find her missing friend Billy Costa, who has been kidnapped by the mysterious ‘Gobblers’. Her ordeal starts in Oxford, not the Oxford we know, but an Oxford in a parallel world. Lyra soon finds herself wrapped up in a hypothetical tug of war between the sinister Magisterium and Nicole Kidman’s character, Mrs Coulter. Lyra holds in her possession a powerful tool, the golden compass otherwise known as Alethiometer. It was given to her by the master of Jordon college and it has the ability to read the truth, past and present. During her unexpected expedition to the North Pole she recruits the help of Gyptians, Witches and the mighty polar bear Iorek Byrnison (voiced by Ian McKellan).
                                                                                                   
Now it ‘s fair to say that this production has had problems from the start of the creative process. Putting aside the religious debacle, New Line were forced to contend with the screenwriter / director, Chris Weitz quitting half way through shooting only to return less than a year later. Of course this had a knock on effect on budgets and shooting schedules. Despite this The Golden Compass held enough interest to see it hailed as 2007’s biggest release.

Weitz has produced a script that stays very loyal to its literally counterpart (Philip Pullman’s book titled ‘Northern Lights’). Yet, during the adaptation process the story has lost some of its impact.  Watching the movie version gave me the impression that it seemed too self aware of its purpose and existence. It appears that the filmmaking team have used a ‘blockbuster movie making by numbers’ formula. No risks are taken, music comes in where you expect it to, it is easy to predict actor’s next lines and the action plays out just as any other fantasy movie before it. To simply summarise, they played it safe. The other problem lingering is the plot is a little more complex than the average children’s flick. The story doesn’t take a straight path and consequently it intertwines causing slight confusion. Also the vocabulary and language used could be potentially challenging to many children. Ages 12 and older would be an ideal audience, so don’t expect another kid friendly ‘Stardust’ - wait for Disney’s ‘Enchanted’ to be released instead.

So what keeps you from walking out 20 minutes in and claiming your £6 back? Well, it’s the quality of the Compass’s Characters. Whereas the story has been diluted, the characters remain rich and this makes them extremely watchable.  Debutant Dakota Blue Richards is very believable as Lyra and holds her own acting opposite Kidman, Craig and Mckellan. Daniel Craig doesn’t hold much screen time, however fits in well as Lord Asriel. As a bonus for the thespian, Craig finds himself in a grueling fight scene – a little warm up training for Bond 22. It goes without saying that veteran brit Sir Ian McKellan does a sterling job, lending his booming voice to the colossal polar bear. Speaking of great voices, no American has a grainer deep voice as Sam Elliot (Big Lebowski). Elliot enters into the frame about half way through as Lee Scorsby an experienced Aeronaught. At this point he steals the limelight from his peers and displays a good marriage of actor and character.

Another intriguing aspect to The Golden Compass is the introduction of Daemons. A daemon is reflection of a person’s soul represented as an animal, only existing in Lyra’s world by accompanying each and every human. Freddy Highmore (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) provides the voice for Lyra’s daemon, which cleverly lets the audience know what Lyra is thinking and plotting. Of course these companions could not have been made possible if it wasn’t for the animation technology available. Each and every Daemon has been animated in a super slick way. It is inspiring to see how the CG creatures interact with the human actors. And it is the use of animation that sets this movie apart from the countless below average fantasy flicks before it. Lyra’s world is set and composed almost exclusively in lush computer generated backdrops. It makes for spectacular viewing and is best described as virtual eye candy.

On summing up, I really think this fledging franchise has a lot more to offer. The creators need to push the original material and try to give the audience a fresh, new approach to tackling the fantasy genre. But they better turn it around quick, as they are already a third the way through the trilogy. I am really caught in the middle on this one, so I can give this analogy: The Golden Compass is strides ahead of C.S Lewis’s Narnia but no wear as fine or atmospheric as the Harry Potter movies. GS

30 Days of Night doesn’t break new ground, instead it proves tradition vampire movie values can still entertain in today’s modern cinema.  Brit director David Slade has created a visually stunning movie, filling each frame with moody land and sky scape’s. By implementing an intention-grabbing intro, Slade manages to set the tone perfectly for the brutally cold story line to follow. 30 days references and owes its existence to Steven Nile’s comic book miniseries. Like successful comic to movie adaptations before it, 30 days manages to effortlessly translate the story from page to screen.

The plot is uncomplicated; a small town in Alaska receives no light for 30 days and night, once a year. During this period the small community soon find themselves under siege from a band of bloodthirsty vampires. The defending residents are led and protected by the sheriff Eben (Josh Hartnett) and the vampires are guided Marlow (Danny Huston – John Huston’s son).

30 Days utilises the same sense of isolation as John Carpenters ‘The Thing’ and places its characters in a similar type of situation as the ‘Dawn of the Dead’. Gore fiends wont be disappointed, as the violence is not even slightly muted, with plenty of claret spurting on the surrounding snow and camera lenses. I can’t believe this movie was passed with a 15 certificate! (Just check out the decapitation scene.) My only disappointment was the blatant rip off one particular scene (I wont tell you which one as it is pivotal the script). It is almost identical to a scene in Blade 2 shot for shot – maybes a bit creativity could have been used instead plagiarising.

In the end, Slade and his team have spun an enjoyable tale of good vs. evil set against a chilling backdrop. Fans of the original comic book, vampire movies and 1970’s horrors will lap up 30 Days of Night. GS

It’s not everyday you can say that you were greeted by uniformed staff and escorted down a red carpet into a grand venue. Well, tonight I did just that. Tyneside on the Toon’s latest event was a special screening of ‘Dr Strangelove’ at the stunning Council Chambers in Newcastle.

After been welcomed by a pair of women dressed in military suit’s I headed up the wide staircase to the bar. I don’t k now what it is about these events, but I always seem to spot other cinematic similarities within the venue - maybe it’s just me, but I thought the bar was identical in style to the hotel bar in Kubrick’s ‘The Shining’. Read on

Finally with the release of ‘Planet Terror’ do UK audiences get a chance to see what all the hype was about?  It may not be the full epic ‘Grindhouse’ double-bill we were originally promised, but it is as good as we are going to get.

While ‘Death Proof’ took place squarely in the art-house exploitation world of ‘Kill Bill’, ‘Planet Terror’ fits in nicely with the rest of the Rodriguez oeuvre – featuring the guns of ‘Desperado’, the guns and strippers of ‘Sin City’, and the guns, strippers and undead mayhem of ‘From Dusk Till Dawn’.  There appears to be a pattern forming!

The movie has no real plot to speak of – zombies are unleashed, zombies kill people, survivors escape.  You could say this is fair enough for a ‘mere horror movie’, but Tarantino managed to twist the slasher movie to produce something refreshing.  ‘Planet Terror’ fails to stand out amongst the recent outbreak (pun intended) of living dead movies – showing none of the wit of ‘Shaun Of The Dead’ and none of the adrenaline-fuelled scares of the ’28 Days Later’ series.  Nor do the zombies offer anything new to the genre – hell, they aren’t even scary – content as they are with being little more than a lead in to another inventive gore scene.  ‘Death Proof’, with its sole man in a car, managed more chills than this film’s army of limb-stealing ghouls.

Perhaps I’m being a little harsh.  What little plot there is rolls along nicely, with enough little flourishes and twists to keep you surprised.  Plus, unlike the often-draining ‘Death Proof’ – with its lengthy dialogue scenes – ‘Planet Terror’ is never dull.  While not at all scary, it is immensely fun to watch.  It’s the kind of movie that cries out for a crowded cinema – boasting an inventive groan/cheer moment at least once a minute.  The special effects, as with ‘Death Proof’, are fantastic – cleverly avoiding the temptation to ape the lousy effects of the original grindhouse movies.  It also boasts a suitably B-movie cast to go with the plot, featuring genre favourites Tom Savini, Michael Biehn and Jeff Fahey amongst the more known faces.  It looks to have been a lot of fun to make.  The soundtrack (almost solely the work of Rodriguez himself) is superb – the main theme in particular (popularised on the ‘Grindhouse’ trailer) is a work of sax-soaked genius.  Additional John Carpenter-esque synth should be enough to evoke nostalgia in even the most sceptical of B-movie fans (and ties in nicely to Kurt Russell’s starring role in ‘Death Proof’).

As way of an appetiser for the movie proper, the Rodriguez-directed faux trailer for ‘They Call Him Machete’ is included – and just goes to prove what a great idea they were to begin with.  Short, funny, outrageous – it distils everything we were made to expect from this project into a minute and a half.  ‘Death Proof’ would definitely have benefited from having one as a lead-in.   It’s a real shame that we will never see the trailers for ‘Don’t’, ‘Thanksgiving’, or ‘Werewolf Women Of The SS’ on the big screen.

Halloween is undoubtedly the most atmospheric and exciting festive period of the year. It captures children’s imagination like no other day in the calendar. Sadly as you get older you can’t dress up and go Halloweening around neighbours doors like you did when you were young. Instead, if you want to keep the ghoulish spirit alive you need to find something a little more ‘grown-up’ to take part in.

This is where Tyneside on the Toon comes in…Tonight’s event was created to screen Nosferatu and celebrate ‘Halloween’ within Newcastle’s All Saints Church. Much to my delight it turned into more of experience than a trip to the cinema and the movie took a side step to allow Halloween to shine. Read on

I’m going to start this review by quoting Jason Lee’s character Brian from Vanilla Sky: ‘The sweet is never as sweet without the sour’. On Sunday night during a screening of ‘Mr Woodcock’ I tasted the sour. If it wasn’t bad enough having to sit through another dull Hollywood comedy (more on that later) I had to endure the experience of being surrounded by a bunch of morons. Amongst my favorites was the couple who had a full conversation during the film, the charvas who stomped down the stairs and back up about 5 times, a teenage girl who thought it was appropriate to swing her beaded necklace around constantly and the lad who persisted on shaking his legs in order to make his chair squeak. If ITV ever makes ‘Cinema screenings From Hell’ I will nominate myself to be interviewed about my shitty time.

The movie itself presented its own cinematic pitfalls. After Billy Bob Thornton’s hilarious role as the bad Santa in ‘Bad Santa’, Sean William Scott in ‘American Pie’ and acting caliber of Susan Sarandon, its easy to think that ‘Mr Woodcock’ would make for a sure fire hit. Well you know what thought did…

The story centers on John Farley (Sean William Scott), who has battled through his childhood weight issues and constant bullying from his gym teacher Mr Woodcock (Thornton). Now in his twenties Farley is a best selling author who writes about turning negative experiences into positive ones. On returning home to receive the key to the city he learns the infamous Mr Woodcock has started dating his Mom.

The main flaw with Woodcock is the way in which the surreal comedy is played out. The comedy style falls somewhere in-between ‘new Hollywood’ and tradition gross out comedy, crucially not committing itself to either genre. A movie stuck in limbo leads the audience into limbo too. Looking back on the movie I could only pick out two scenes that made me laugh and they were by no means original. One gag was borrowed from the Jackass crew and the other was good comic timing in the style of American Pie humor. Still I couldn’t help but think that the script had potential. Instead of trying to play it safe the director and his team should have looked for their own way.

Celluloid calculation: £6 per cinema ticket divided by 2 = 3 = 1 laugh costs £3. I recommend you wait until its released on TV for free if you must persist in wanting to watch it. GS

Quentin Tarantino’s fifth film outing is Death Proof…a homage to violent 70’s exploitation films.The ultra thin non-plot revolves around a psychopathic stuntman, living in his past, stalking eight girls in his 1970 Chevy Nova in and around the dusty roads of America.Thankfully, it’s not the uncomplicated story-line grabbing QT’s attention. Instead he is intent on dragging B-movie genres into today’s cinema.
Whereas Kill Bill Vol ll divided and split audiences…Death Proof will do it again.
Tarantino fans and cinema lovers will lap his efforts up and their backsides will be pinned to the seat wearing joker-esque grins in delight. As well as been treated to that unique moviemaking style, they will notice every reference and in-joke projected on the silver screen.

Then there’s the regular cinemagoer, walking in from the chilly autumn evening already shivering, cold, and un-prepared. The first hurdle is the deliberately dodgy print complete with hair / dust particles. It regularly jumps and misses frames. I appreciate this might be distracting to the non-Tarantinos and will leave them slighty puzzled. Second barrier is the slower pace the narrative is kept at. In comparison to the fast blockbusters and comedies shoved in our faces each summer. That alone could test this side of audience patience.

Kurt Russell plays the extremely sinister Stuntman Mike. The character remains charming complete with a hideous facial scar. He is perfectly cast making his character excruciatingly believable. And yes, he still wears his mullet with style; in fact Russell’s hair has a personality of its own and warrants its own credit. Stuntman Mike is involved in some memorable scenes, including an up close and personal lap-dance from Vanessa Ferlito’s character ‘Butterfly’ (maybe the reason this scene was cut from the U.S version was to save Goldie Hawn’s blushes at the premiere). And word of warning, try to eat your nachos before the bar scene starts and we are introduced to Mike (around 20mins in).

Unorthodoxly Death Proof has eight female leads split into two groups of four sharing fifty percent of the movie each. Stand out performances come from Vanessa Ferlito (of CSI fame) whose sassy character Butterfly flaunts her ass, lips and legs to devastating effect. She reminds me of a young Anglie Jolie, in looks and manner. For the first half the movie 6 foot Sydney Poitier’s (daughter of Sidney Poitier) character local DJ ‘Jungle Julia’ dominates the screen, at least until Stuntman Mike creeps into the picture. She was given some cool snappy dialogue and uses it in typical Tarantino mode of acting. In a genius piece of casting Zoë Bell has being cast as herself. For those of you who don’t recognise the name, Zoë was Uma Thurman’s stunt double in both of the Kill Bill movies. In Death Proof she plays a New Zealander stuntwoman (you probably spotted her on the Grindhouse trailers hanging off the bonnet of a car) who is put through a gruelling shoot and let’s just say that NO CGI was used…

Since setting cinematic musical standards in Reservoir Dogs, QT soundtracks are as eagerly awaited as the feature itself. Each movie he has released has being accompanied by a sublime soundtrack, making tracks from the director’s personal record collection infamous. In fact Death Proof relies more on music than any of the four QT movies, which is mirrored in number of tracks played throughout the screen time.
Death Proof’s voyeuristic themes entertain me (I stand on the section of football terrace belonging to fans and devotees). I especially liked the way Tarantino referenced his own films (Twisted Nerve ring tone was a nice touch) as well as paying homage to classics like ‘Vanishing Point’, ‘Big Trouble in Little China’ and ‘Death Race 2000’. One sadness, the British audience wasn’t given the chance to see the original 1hour30mins cut alongside its sister movie Robert Rodriguez’s ‘Planet Terror’ as the double bill ‘Grindhouse’.
Plus one query: Just WHAT is it with feet in Tarantino flicks??? Stuntman Gav


Read an interview with Kurt Russell here

Shoot 'Em Up, starts with a Sergio Leone close-up introduction to mysterious carrot munching Smith (Clive Owen, abut reprising his turn in 2005's Sin City). The action begins immediately with an improbable Shoot 'Em Up (the title is no red herring)
as Smith plays knight in shinning armour delivering a woman’s baby under a hail bullets whilst racking up the body count. The subsequent "plot" revolves around
Smith protecting the newborn from an army of gunmen. Head of this army is Hertz, (Paul Giamatti) feasting on scenery giving his best Cagney impersonation, a misanthropic psychotic who is hounded by a continually nagging wife.
The game of cat and mouse ensures with Monica Belluccis' Donna along for the ride as eye candy (example to the right). Smith battles his way through the legions of faceless henchman and we are treated to eye popping action scenes.

So is it any good? If you liked The Transporter/Crank then the answer is yes. The viewing experience felt very much like watching an arcade machine and I believe this was Michael Davis's intention following in the wake of his similarly toned Monster Man (2003). It's combination of John Woo influenced action sequences and heavy
guitar soundtracks that make this movie ideal for the non-thinking late night post pub audience.
However, if you're looking for smart dialogue, intelligent storyline with characters you believe in and care about, you best look elsewhere. Shoot Em Up is an interesting disposable curiosity for the Jason Statham generation, but doesn’t make for classic repeat viewing material. David Jackson

Cynic Mike Enslin (John Cusack) is a paranormal writer who tours the USA compiling books and selling such titles as ’10 best haunted hotels’. After receiving an intriguing postcard about the Dolphin Hotel stating ‘don’t stay in room 1408’ Enslin seems to feel compelled to investigate. After arriving in New York he attempts to check in, on doing so is met by the manager (Sam L Jackson) who tries his best to deter Enslin from staying in the infamous room. After a brief discussion/argument Enslin decides to….yip you guessed it, refuse and spend the night…

It’s been a while since I have visited the cinema to watch a horror, actually it’s been a while since I watched a QUALITY horror film at the cinema. Watching horrors is like exercising. If you haven’t excised for a year or two and you suddenly work out, it’s going to hit your body hard. Well this is exactly how I felt on watching 1408, I can’t remember the last time I watched a movie in this genre - cinematically I am in bad shape. Admittedly I felt vulnerable while I sat there holding my giant tub of Ben and Jerry’s. It didn’t help that 1408 is a superbly crafted psychological horror designed to send shivers and shocks through your body.

Now I have grew up with horrors and have became immune to all the tricks and gimmicks used to scare the living s**t out of people. (I have yet to sit through a William Castle screening…so that might change) Yet, tonight watching 1408 I felt the fear and suspense generated by Stephen King’s story. It was the creepiness and power of suggestion that grabbed me and forced me to sit feeling uncomfortable waiting for the next spine tingler. Robert Wise’s classic ‘The Haunting’ successfully used similar techniques 44 years prior to this and that still bugs me out. Now when you are sat in your seat in a darkened cinema nervously fidgeting and hiding behind a bottle of water, you know the flick has proved itself. My only complaint is the distributors should have held out for a extra month and released 1408 in October, as it holds all the right ingredients for a Halloween classic. As there wasn’t a massive amount of SFX, it was the strength of director Mikael Hafstorm and his sound team in producing the supernatural elements that defined 1408 abilities to terrorise your imagination. Cusack played his part too and was very convincing in a physical role. Maybe just like character actor Jeffery Combs Cusacks acting career lies within this genre? So if it’s a terrifying movie you’re after next time your visit the cinema, then 1408 will gladly play host for the night. GS

Originally ‘Knocked up’ was meant to be a sequel to Judd Apatow’s ’40 Year Old Virgin’ with the intention of Seth Rogan and co reprising their characters as the ‘Tech Team’. After numerous re-writes ‘Knocked up’ became the stand-alone movie released on the silver screen today. The basic story-line goes like this: after a drunken 'one night stand' a young couple end up getting pregnant and having to deal with the 9 month aftermath.

The movie opens with a classic head bobbing rap track by Ol Dirty Bastard ‘Shimmy Shimmy Ya’ which is a fine way to set the pace of the narrative. Within the titles we are shown numerous shots of what seems to be college ‘stoners’…, Seth Rogan’s character Ben Stone being one of them. They are getting stoned and indulging in immature activities to high standard. Then we cut to Katherine Heigl’s Alison Scott engaging in white picket family activities with her Sister Debbie (Leslie Mann) and children. Predictably we have two polar opposites with entirely different lifestyles – it’s that classic Romeo and Juliet situation with warped twist. Now at this point the regular moviegoer could have a pretty good guess at the storyline and challenges ahead of the principle characters. Thankfully, Apatow’s script has no intention on relying a strong story instead the focus is aimed on life’s trials, character development and comedy.

Knocked Up’s success comes from its ability to relate to the audience, although this is a comedy, human emotion and relationships feature prominently. Anybody in who is in a serious relationship, due to get married or expecting a baby will probably cringe at some of scenes or will think ‘yeah I know what they are talking about!’ It is almost like the filmmakers are holding up a giant mirror to the audience and saying 'take a look at society today'. To thicken the enjoyment we are treated to some crazy ass rich characters that take part in some comical scenes. Ben’s housemates are a mix of messed up twenty something’s with a mega-relaxed attitude towards life, notably Jay Baruchel plays an oddball character Jay who gave me a few belly laughs. Comedy veteran Paul Rudd (Clueless, Friends, Anchorman) nails his character as Pete, representing millions of confused married men in a ‘zombie like’ state. As the film progresses he lured out of his mundane routines by Ben and his slacker ways. Make sure you don’t miss Rudd’s impersonation of Robert De Niro - it is uncanny!

To sum up, Apatow’s latest effort doesn’t scale the hilarious heights of ’40 year old Virgin’ but it does enough entertain and warrant its value for your ticket price. If there was an award for the amount of film reverences within a film I think this could be a strong contender – Its clear Apatow and crew are mega movie buffs (I particularly liked the ‘Swingers’ money nod). Also this could possibly serve as the next best thing to traditional contraception, where its ‘Something About Mary’ has the balls in a zipper scene, Knocked Up has…well I wont spoil it for you. “Just do it already”. GS

A small pet hate of mine is when someone states, “the movie was nowhere near as good as the book”. Well, not sure if THEY have noticed but a book and a movie are two different mediums. Of course a book is going to have more depth and story, thanks to the shear nature of reading. With a book you pick it up read it a couple of pages and put it back down until you want to read more. And authors are aware of this and that’s why the obligatory ‘cliff-hangers’ are inserted at the end each chapter – to keep the reader going. Now the nature of cinema is worlds apart from its literary cousin. A filmmaker roughly has no more 3 hours max to tell his story and entertain their audience. To read a book takes about 8 hours, if not more. Could you imagine a 8 hour flick?…didn’t think so. Now I have read the Potter books and they are superb. And, I have also seen and added all the Potter movies to my DVD collection, which means I dig them too. You can only ever capture the essence of book when transforming it for the silver screen. So you either live it and enjoy, or spend your 6 quid elsewhere.
The attraction of the Harry Potter franchise for me has always been the atmosphere and feelings the movies generate. The imagination put into the scripts, set design, soundtrack and costumes collectively make a cinematic experience like no other. And this reflects in the success each instalment and its box office takings.
Just like its predecessors The Order of the Phoenix is set during another school year at Hogwarts. Inevitably each year has grown darker and each year we see Harry and his pals grow older. As well as dealing with family, girlfriends, teachers, the ministry and friend problems, Harry has the small matter of Lord Voldemort and Death Eaters to deal with. Harry has been made scapegoat since the previous year and virtually none of wizardry world believes that the Dark Lord has returned. Leaving Harry looking like a liar and potentially responsible for the murder of Cedric Diggery.

The director this time is virtually unknown Merseysider David Yates. His CV is mainly built up with TV credits, which includes a couple of The Bill episodes. He has brought with him his longstanding composer Nicholas Hooper. Together they bring a strong sense of realism to the HP movies. It creates interesting comparisons between the fantasy and real world. Scenes take place in suburban play parks, subways and even a ‘broom flyby’ the houses of parliament via the Thames.

Just as every instalment before we are also introduced to fresh characters, notably Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton), Luna Lovegood and Bellatrix Lestrange. I was a bit disappointed with the screen time Helena Bonham Carter had, I guess I was expecting more. Although, she does plays a pivotal part and is primed for a more involved role in the next instalment. Carter makes a big impact with her camped up Bellatrix Lestrange and it is scary how well she plays a lunatic witch. I am looking forward to seeing her in Tim Burton’s ‘Sweeny Todd’ as Mrs Lovett as well. And speaking of strange and weird characters Luna Lovegood is rich character who manages to steal a piece of the limelight. Brilliantly played by Evanna Lynch, Lovegood, because of her kookiness is bullied and persecuted by fellow students. In turn this leads to a relationship with Harry, who in turn brings her into his circle of friends.
For whatever reason Steven Kloves did not adapt the screenplay this time round…and it shows. The storyline is simple in comparison to the four previous movies and is far less complex. There was something just not write about the feel of the story. Although Kloves is already busy penning the next sequel ‘The Half Blood Prince’, so not all is lost.

Stubbornly The Order of the Phoenix keeps Potter fans happy and pushes the story on. If you haven’t read the books there is a few surprises and twists there. And the special effects continue to improve and raise the bar. Check out the scene where a terraced house in London extends to reveal a secret house – superb animation.
It wasn’t a perfect flick and didn’t come near the greatness of ‘Prisoner of Azkaban’ (my personal favourite). But, if you enjoy the Harry Potter movies it is well worth a look and defiantly whets the appetite for ‘Half Blood Prince’ next year. GS

A story based on the greatest stories ever told is a formula for certain cinematic success. And William Steig’s story of Shrek and his friends is the proof in the pudding.Trilogies are great for the film industry. The studio fat cats get fatter and are able to make more movies. The audience get to see more of the characters they love. The cinemas get to share the success too. And lets face it, three is the magic number. Despite this, there has always been an element danger attached to the sequels. Firstly, the filmmakers have set the bar high with the first instalment and must equal or top their previous effort. And secondly the temptation of remoulding the winning formula of the first movie needs to be avoided so the audience doesn’t feel cheated out of their five quid. Shrek 2 managed to avoid these pitfalls with style and ease. And thankfully Shrek the Third doesn’t break this trend either. In the first Shrek the Dreamworks animators were still finding their feet and as a result the animation suffered a little. Which it didn’t matter and it went unnoticed under a cloak of good characters and story writing. Shrek 2 with slicker animation topped its predecessor and smashed its box office takings setting up an inevitable third chapter. Shrek the Third has turned out to be a finely tuned movie that has learned from its past experiences and weaknesses.

The story is driven by Prince Charmings will to take revenge on Far Far Away Land and reclaim what he sees as his rightful place on the thrown. Charming rounds together a band of villains (Captain Hook and Big bad wolf to name a few) to help him in defeating Shrek and his friends. Cleverly we have true to life issues sewn through out the film. Shrek deals with the painful news he is going to be a father, Fiona has the death of her father to cope with. And common subjects like friendship, betrayal, growing up and family problems are chucked in for good measure. Its all-pretty deep for a family movie don’t you think? Well it would be if it weren’t counter balanced by grade A comedy and bags of funny scenes. The Shrek movies simply provide perfect family entertainment, with laughs for all age groups. And it was illustrated tonight by the giggles that bounced around the cinema at different times coming from people of different ages. The script keeps to the basics and is kept simple. We are introduced to new characters including ‘Arty’ voiced by Justin Timberlake. Arty or Arthur is a teenage geek who is next to take thrown after Shrek dumps the role. I was impressed by Timberlakes efforts and he created an enjoyable character. But I think he was somewhat upstaged by Merlin voiced by Python’s Eric Idle, who has some hilarious scenes. And it goes without saying that cast regulars Myers, Murphy, Cleese, Diaz and Banderas are as entertaining as ever. However, there’s just on thing I need to get off my chest…why is it necessary to use modern songs at any opportunity in a film set in medieval times? It totally spoils the films tone and