The Five-Year Engagement follows Tom (Segel) and Violet (Blunt), two likeable young lovers who plan to tie the knot when Tom proposes one year after they first meet. As the wedding plans begin to take shape, a spanner is thrown in the works when Violet lands a dream job in Michigan, prompting the couple to postpone the wedding and uproot from San Francisco.

While Violet fits in perfectly with her new surroundings, Tom’s lack of job prospects creates another in a seemingly endless list of obstacles that make their wedding less and less likely with each passing month. As months turn into years, Tom and Violet’s relationship is put to the test as their epic engagement turns into a living nightmare.

Remember when great comedies were short? Annie Hall, Airplane, Ernest Goes to Camp? They all clock in around the 90-minute mark, and frankly, they didn’t need to be any longer. Somebody needs to remind Judd Apatow that minutes don’t make the movie, especially in the comedy arena, where his painfully long Funny People proved that stretching a comedy out to 146 minutes is, if anything, sincerely unfunny.

Though Judd’s in the producer’s chair for The Five-Year Engagement, this is typical Apatow cannon fodder: overlong, a little self-satisfied and boasting a curious mix of cynicism and romance. The problem is, unlike Forgetting Sarah Marshall (a former Apatow/Segel/Stoller outing), The Five-Year Engagement isn’t all that funny. Segel is as watchable as ever, but there’s little chemistry between the two leads, and even less comic timing.

Perhaps the biggest disappointment in The Five-Year Engagement though is its irksome predictability. Dumbass best friends, shitty bosses, gross fat blokes and an inevitable finale contribute to the film’s flabbiness.

But then, any film that casts Rhys Ifans as the smooth, suave threat to the relationship is never going to be a winner.

Overall Verdict: A disappointingly flimsy effort out of the Apatow cannon.

Reviewer: Lee Griffiths

I have a horrible feeling a lot of critics are going to rip into Rock Of Ages, but I for one loved it. While it has its problems, it made me smile about 30 seconds in and I was beaming when I came out. It’s silly, cheesy and sometimes verges on the ridiculous, but it’s also a hell of a lot of fun, with a plethora of hair metal hits being shoe-horned in, Glee-style (or Mamma Mia! style, if you prefer).

The plot (which to be honest there isn’t a huge amount of) follows Sherrie, who arrives in LA from Oklahoma full of dreams of making it big in the City of Angels. She’s barely off the bus when she bumps into Drew (Diego Boneta), who gets her a job at the famed club, The Bourbon Room. Soon Sherrie and Drew are falling in love, but as the big time beckons for Drew, the course of true love won’t run smooth.

Mixed into this are various other stories, the main one involving the incredibly famous but rather spaced out and living in his own sex, drug and rock ‘n’ roll world, Stacee Jaxx (Tom Cruise). He’s due to play his last gig as a member of the band Arsenal at the Bourbon Room before going solo, and just before going on stage comes across a young reporter (Malin Akerman) who rocks his world, while his manager (Paul Giamatti) reveals himself to be a dodgy dealer. There’s also a group of women, led by Catherine Zeta Jones, who are on a moral crusade to have The Bourbon Room shut down, while the broke owner (Alec Baldwin) tries to keep it open, as well as coming to a realisation about his relationship to his second-in-command (Russell Brand).

As you can tell from that synopsis, Rock Of Ages wouldn’t know an original plot point if one came and bit it on the ass. But that’s kind of the point. Not only does it take its endless parade of songs from the 1980s, but its slight story also self-consciously references the likes of Flashdance and Footloose. If the film has one major flaw it’s that it takes an awful long time to deal with very little plot (and also has a tendency to throw in story points, again casting back to other movies, that don’t go anywhere), but even so it doesn’t drag.

And the main reason it does run over two hours is that it manages to fit in a huge array of 80s classics, from Paradise City and Every Rose Has Its Thorn to Pour Some Sugar On It and the ubiquitous Don’t Stop Believin’. The likes of Sister Christian, Just Like Paradise and Nothin’ But A Good Time get into a mash-up and even REO Speedwagon’s Can’t Fight This Feeling gets a homoerotic makeover.

But the question many will be asking is, can Tom Cruise sing? Well, he can here, although I’d be interested to hear what his raw vocals sounded like, as I have the feeling he may have had a bit of electronic assistance. Indeed the whole cast sing their heart out, even Alec Baldwin, who seems well aware he isn’t likely to be launching a music career any time soon. One thing I found kinda interesting that in amongst all the film’s talk of what it takes to make it big in the music world (which here largely seems to consist of having someone believe in you and being in the right place at the right time), comes Mary J. Blige as the owner of a Hollywood strip club, who opens up her lungs and shows that at least in some cases, you make it big because you’ve got a set of pipes that blows everyone else’s away.

It really is in the music that Rock Of Ages comes alive. Director Adam Shankman comes from the world of choreography and previously helmed Hairspray, so he knows what he’s doing when it comes to staging a musical number. He has a great way of finding the heart of the song and situation, and putting that on screen in a lively, energetic fashion.

He starts things off cleverly, with Julianne Hough’s Sherrie breaking into song, only for her fellow bus passengers to quickly join in. It provoked giggles in the screening I attended, but it very quickly allows Rock Of Ages to set out its stall as a movie that’s going to be unabashedly daft and cheesy, and assures it’s left the real world behind before Sherrie arrives in Hollywood. From there on it’s one great song after another, with Shankman throwing in a few showstoppers. For example there’s a particularly impressive number that is essentially Bob Fosse meets pole dancing. It’ll certainly give you a new appreciation for the skill of the exotic dancer.

Rock Of Ages is also kind of interesting formally. The cast list is impressive and part of the reason for that is that it’s set up in a way so that each actor does most of their scenes with only one or two other people, meaning they wouldn’t need to be on set for the whole shoot (and therefore making their appearance that much cheaper) So, for example, Catherine Zeta-Jones is paired with Bryan Cranston, Diego Boneta with Julianne Hough, Alex Baldwin with Russell Brand, and Tom Cruise with Paul Giamatti and Malin Akerman. It makes little difference to the movie, but it’s an interesting way of doing things (and may well be a hangover from the original stage version).

To enjoy the movie, you do need a bit of a soft spot for slightly camp cheesiness and the hair metal hits of the 80s (although I’m not sure it’s possible to be a fan of the latter with an appreciation of the former). If you’re prepared to go along with it, you’ll have a great time. Like I said, I have a feeling a lot of critics will rip into the lack of plot, innate cheesiness, lengthy running time and some will probably feel what’s done to the likes of Journey, Def Leppard and Guns N Roses is sacrilege.

Stuff the naysayers though, as Rock Of Ages is great fun. Yes it’s silly and some of the jokes fall horribly flat (many appear to have been left in from the Broadway version, but don’t work on screen in the way they would on stage) but it’s all about making you feel good and it does that in spades. I left the cinema grinning and humming Every Rose Has Its Thorn, and it’s not every film that can do that!

Overall Verdict: It’s not for everyone, but if you fancy a bit of rather camp rock ‘n’ roll, all dressed up with a cheesy but fun story, loads of hairspray and Tom Cruise playing an all-singing, spaced out sex god, Rock Of Ages is the film for you! Yes, it’s just a bizarre as if sounds, and that’s a good thing.

Reviewer: Tim Isaac

Whether it’s a salute to cheap Mexican melodrama, a belated cash-in on the modern ‘Grindhouse’ phenomenon or just an excuse to act like a tit in another language, Will Ferrell’s latest is a weird, sometimes wonderful and often surreal comedy western.

Ferrell stars as a loyal but dumb Mexican ranch hand, Armando, who struggles to gain the respect of his father while struggling to keep the business afloat. When Armando’s successful businessman brother (Diego Luna) returns to the nest with his beautiful new fiancé it seems as though the family’s money worries are over. However, Armando soon learns that his brother’s business dealings haven’t exactly been above board, which has in turn incurred the wrath of renowned mobster, Onza (Gael Garcia Bernal).

With his family in danger and his love for his brother’s fiancé blooming, Armando must man up and take on the bad guys. And all this while speaking pretty good Spanish.

Yep, the biggest surprise for Ferrell fans is that Casa de mi Padre is entirely in Spanish (albeit with a few English lines thrown in – and it’s subtitled of course), with Ferrell doing a half decent job of learning the Spanish dialogue (in a month apparently) and delivering his lines in a fairly inoffensive and curiously heartfelt way.

We’re not sure if Will’s Anchorman fanbase will approve (what were the studio execs supposed to do with this film exactly?), but one thing that Casa does share with its Ferrell predecessors is the inane silliness. Cheap sets, ludicrous dialogue, mechanical white tigers and the weirdest bare bottom sex scene provide some solid laughs for Ferrell followers and those tickled by gags of the Mel Brooks variety.

But Casa is a far stranger film than some might expect, less Blazing Saddles and more El Topo: a ‘midnight movie’ you can enjoy in the afternoon. See it to believe.

Overall Verdict: A weird and sometimes wonderful comedy that falls somewhere between satire, spoof and surreal spiritual journey.

Reviewer: Lee Griffiths

After one of the biggest and most hyperbolic marketing campaigns ever, which did all but suggest that Ridley Scott’s return to sci-fi is a bigger deal than if Jesus returned, Prometheus is here. Ever since it was announced, there’s been a lot of talk about exactly how it’s related to Alien. Scott himself has distanced the film from his earlier effort, saying only that strands of ‘Alien DNA’ would be apparent and that it only becomes a prequel in the last few minutes.

Well, the truth is that this doesn’t just have ‘Alien DNA’, it’s a full-blown prequel. The reason for Scott distancing it is the same as it often is with marketing nowadays – the assumption the audience is stupid (which, to be honest, is often quite a fair assessment for a lot of cinemagoers). There aren’t any xenomorphs (well, pretty much), and so it appears Scott wants to make sure audiences aren’t expecting the iconic facehuggers and aliens and are then disappointed by their absence.

However one of the reasons for the lack of HR Giger’s creatures are because parts of the film are essentially an origin story for the creatures that went on to bother Ripley 40 years after this is set. However the world it’s set in is very much an Alien world, revealing more about things seen in Alien but which weren’t explored in the 1979 sci-fi horror. The main one of these is the so-called ‘space jockey’, a huge mummified creature seen relatively briefly in the alien ship Ripley and co. investigate before they come across the facehuggers, and which becomes more important here.

Two scientists, Elizabeth and Charlie (Noomi Rapace and Logan Marshall-Green), discover that different ancient civilisations across Earth have left clues that point to a particular star system. They’re sent as part of a team to a moon orbiting a planet around this star. Elizabeth stills believes in a higher power while Charlie is less spiritual, but both believe the moon holds clues to mankind’s origins, and the ‘engineers’ they believe seeded human life on Earth.

Just after they arrive, they discover an enormous round structure, which seems too uniform to be natural. Exploring inside they soon come across the bodies of dead aliens, and it appears something has wiped the humanoid creatures out. Elizabeth and Charlie are keen to see what answers they can find – although sad that it appears all the engineers are dead – but this being the world of Alien, there are competing agendas. As franchise fans may suspect, those agendas come from the Weyland Corporation, with android David (Michael Fassbender) apparently doing their bidding.

There are also various other members of the team, from Idris Elba’s captain to Charlize Theron’s mysterious Meredith Vickers, who seems even more devoid of emotion than David is. As you may have guessed, quite a few of these people are there mainly so they can die as strange creatures start to appear and the truth behind what was going on in the alien installation is revealed.

While Alien was small and claustrophobic, Prometheus is a much more epic movie. Indeed one of the most impressive aspects of the film, as you’d expect from Scott, is the world-building, where they seem to have absorbed the lessons of Avatar, where creating a fully formed sci-fi universe doesn’t just look cool, but doing it right actually helps make the 3D seem more integral than tacked on – and the 3D does work extremely well, adding to the experience without becoming distracting. It’s an awesome looking movie with some great action set-pieces and should more than satisfy those looking for a well-made, good-looking, effects filled sci-fi flick.

My main reservations were thematic and with the fact there seem to be a lot of plot holes – well, kind of. To be honest a lot of the time it’s difficult to tell whether certain things are holes or deliberately left unclear. After all, the script was co-written by Damon Lindelof, who became the king of leaving things hanging with TV’s Lost. His love of answering questions by raising more questions is very much in evidence here, with the script seeming to revel in only suggesting answers to things from the original Alien by suggesting 100 other things. However there are certain things that do appear to be major holes that have been papered over, which is kind of annoying when so much care has been taken elsewhere.

More frustrating for those into such things are its thematic failures. Prometheus is a movie that set out its stall to ask big questions – Why are we here? Where did we come from? Is there room for a God? What is the relationship between the creator and created? Early on in the films its big idea after big idea and the whole things builds as if it’s going to be an interesting look into the possibilities of these things. However it eventually becomes apparent that the film feels asking the questions is enough and ought to be patted on the back just for that, as it doesn’t really have much to say about these things that haven’t been said 100 times before.

By about halfway through, its themes start tripping over one another until they become pretty meaningless. There’s still the odd interesting idea, but these start to seem like small realisations in the script they’ve happened on something potentially intriguing rather than something that goes somewhere. Ultimately its thematic weaknesses and its love of leaving things open means that by the end it’s tough to tell whether the movie was actually ‘about’ anything, or if it’s just been doing a big dance to try and get people to think it is.

To be honest it’s not as big a problem as it could have been. The film does so much right around this, from the universe it’s set in to the pacing to the slow reveal of how things piece together (and how they relate to Alien), all ensuring it’s still very entertaining. Indeed I almost wish it hadn’t bothered with all the initial thematic fireworks, as for me, who loves that sort of thing when done well, it became distracting when it started to falter. There are some themes it handles well though, and as with the earlier Alien movies, many of its most interesting ideas surround its android.

Michael Fassbender outdoes Ian Holm and Lance Henriksen on this score, with an eerie performance as David. The script seems far more interested in David than pretty much everything else in the film. He’s far better developed and more fascinating than any of the other characters. Indeed, from the early scenes where he copies lines from Lawrence Of Arabia and apparently dyes his hair to look more like Peter O’Toole, it’s clear this in an android we need to know more about.

While Noomi Rapace’s Alien-style woman-in-peril act occasionally gets a little tiring, especially when it decides to go with the franchise stalwart of finding an excuse for her to run around in her underpants, David never stops being utterly fascinating. Admittedly some of the biggest plot holes/unexplained things swirl around him, but he’s also the centre of its thematic strengths – particularly concerning his role as the creation of a species that has just discovered it was created itself – and Fassbender is utterly beguiling in the role.

Prometheus is a good film and much better than we’ve come to expect from the summer blockbuster season, but it’s flawed. The ending suggests we could well be getting Prometheus 2, and there’s a decent chance some of the things that appear to be problems could well be explained there (particularly the fact that what we see towards the end of Prometheus – and which on the surface appears to be setting things up for the arrival of the Nostromo and Ripley 40 years later – is different to what we see in Alien).

To be honest, those just looking for an extremely well-made, gorgeous looking sci-fi thriller are unlikely to have any problem with it at all. However if you’re the type of person who likes big ideas in a movie, prepare to be promised a lot in the first hour only for it to fizzle out – with a few intriguing exceptions – in the second.

Overall Verdict: A beautiful looking and entertaining trip back into a world that contains more than just ‘Alien DNA’, although it’s a shame the script couldn’t have been a little tighter and more thematically satisfying.

Reviewer: Tim Isaac

I’m starting to think that somewhere in a high office in Hollywood, just down the corridor from the swimming pool filled with cocaine, there is a man in an expensive suit sitting at a huge desk in a beautifully laid out office whose job it is to simply throw darts at a chart filled with classic stories, a chart titled “Gritty Reboots”.

Gritty reboots – the taking of beloved stories and making them modern, hip and cool – are a confusing genre in that they are almost guaranteed money makers but rarely ever actually any good. Little Red Riding Hood has already been tarnished forever by a risible Amanda Seyfried vehicle, even the mighty Tim Burton struggled to lift Alice In Wonderland above the mediocre and it looks like Hollywood will continue to cut enthusiastically cutting from this cloth early next year with Bryan Singer’s Jack The Giant Killer. And so it is that debut director Rupert Sanders brings us a goth-chic rehash of Grimm fairytale stalwart, Snow White.

Unless you were raised by a family that believes fairytales to be the work of Satan, you probably know where this is going. Kristen Stewart plays the eponymous heroine, the fairest princess in the land, orphaned and imprisoned by Charlize Theron’s mad enchantress Ravenna. When Ravenna’s magic mirror nonchalantly informs her that she is no longer “fairest of them all”, Snow finds herself on the hit-list and escapes, only to be pursued by a local huntsman in the employ of the queen (Chris Hemsworth). Then there’s some dwarves, an apple, a lot of talk about destiny and so forth, as well as, for this version, a nice big battle to take us home. In short, you know this by heart, so it had better be good. Unfortunately despite valiant efforts to keep us entertained, Snow White and the Huntsman (or SWATH as it shall henceforth be known) is a disappointment in nearly every department.

The biggest flaw on show here is the script. Penned by the triumvirate of relative newcomer Hossein Amini (Drive), John Lee Hancock (The Blind Side) and Evan Daugherty (newcomer), the story and pacing smacks of too many cooks and a failure of communication between them. The film’s opening act is, in a word, boring. Sluggishly paced and with no gravitas whatsoever, it leaves the audience utterly ambivalent to a story we already know, which is a rather catastrophic combination by any standards. The normally splendid Theron is left flailing with a motiveless, textureless antagonist in Ravenna. Poorly conceived and poorly directed, she turns the dial marked “Evil” up to 11 far too early, leaving her with nowhere to go but down to what may be looked back on as a career low for her (yes, worse than Aeon Flux).

Current guaranteed box-office draw Kristen Stewart fares little better. Whilst more likeable than her Twilight persona Bella Swan, we still don’t find much to get us behind her Snow White. Again, lack of direction plays its part as Snow cuts a very generic figure. When you’re as lovely and perfect as she’s made out to be here, how are the audience supposed to relate to you? Stewart often appears vacant and vapid, like the girl at school who sits in the corner, wears too much eyeliner and rights ‘deep’ poetry about how nobody cares about her. With all the hardship stacked against her, we’re left with one reaction: “So?”.

SWATH does a couple of things right. For starters, it looks fantastic. Cinematographer Greig Fraser and Production Designer Dominic Watkins pull out all the stops in making a believable but sinister fantasy world. The film also picks up noticeably with the arrival of the dwarves. Without giving too much away, the way they are presented adds some much needed fun to proceedings. Indeed, from that point on until the final few scenes, the film revels in its fantastical roots rather than skulking around trying to look cool.

Sadly, none of this is enough to give SWATH any kind of recommendation. It’s an out-and-out fantasy that tries to be cool and ends up being boring. It could have been a piece of decent summer escapism, but it just doesn’t do enough new things to keep its audience interested.

Overall Verdict: A film seemingly designed for the phrase “Meh”. Some decent elements are too few and far between to paper over the plodding pace, stilted performances and uninspired storytelling. A big disappointment.

Reviewer: Alex Hall

It has been 10 years since we last heard from the Men In Black. The successful film series has grossed over $1 billion worldwide at the box office, not to mention having vast DVD sales. Has the world forgotten MIB? Is it still relevant today when action/alien films are ten-a-penny? Well, this is a welcome return to the franchise – it delivers nothing new but fits like a comfortable pair of slippers and entertains nonetheless.

The film, like the previous two, is directed by Barry Sonnenfeld, and there is no need to introduce the familiar characters, although there are a few new ones to add into the mix. The plot starts off with Nicole Scherzinger helping free Boris the Animal (Jermaine Clement) from prison – this really is a rather pointless cameo in her movie debut, where she does nothing more than walk around in a rubber outfit holding a cake. Boris is the last of the Bogladites, who are an ugly ruthless alien species hellbent on annihilating any other species and their planets too. Boris manages to go back in time, altering the present so that Earth can be now under attack from the Bogladites. And worst of all, all memories of Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) have been wiped of the planet, as Boris’ exploits in the past mean he died in 1969. Will Smith (Agent J) head back in time to set things back on track, but can he save the planet and Agent K? Of course he will – this if good old family fun!

Where this film works and many other recent alien films have failed (e.g. John Carter and Battleship), is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously. The comic timing is perfect and humour runs consistently both on the surface with the wisecracking quips between characters and also subliminally throughout the film, whereas many other films jump erratically between humour and action. Highlights of the almost subliminal touches are where we see Lady Gaga’s face being shown regularly in the MIB offices (is she an alien? – I think so!), and when we go back to 1969 the Aliens look like those that we would see in the likes of Star Trek, with large heads and shiny shimmering gowns, all very subtle but the attention to detail is brilliant. This is definitely a labour of love.

There are plenty of nice touches in the past, such as Will Smith being a black man in a fast car obviously coming to the attention of the police. The issue of racism is dealt with in a very clever scene. It’s also quite nifty that Andy Warhol is actually an MIB agent, who hates his role as he can’t tell the men from the women!

Apart from Will Smith and some of the incredible alien creatures, the film belongs to Josh Brolin, who gives an amazing performance as a young Tommy Lee Jones. His intonation, voice, mannerisms and characteristics make him wholly believable as a younger, less craggy version of Agent K. Brolin steals nearly every scene he is in with his smouldering intensity and jet black slicked hair. He is definitely one of today’s greatest underrated actors, from playing W Bush to his roles in True Grit and Milk.

Overall Verdict: Whilst most trilogies have run out of steam by the last film and are only made to milk the paying audience, MiB3 actually seems stronger than the first two and perhaps the 10 year gap has allowed the film and ideas to mature, so we are delivered a thoroughly entertaining film, with a nice little twist at the end….

Reviewer: Stephen Sclater