Just when you think you’ve had enough of well-meaning films featuring disabilities and heroic struggles along comes one that completely restores your faith. Xavier Dolan’s film is a tour de force, an emotional power-punch that slowly makes its way into your head and then into your heart. It may deal with a lot of clichés but finds a winning way to tell its story.

Anne Dorval is Die, a handsome but tired-looking woman who has lost her husband three years ago and is now stuck with looking after her son Steve (Antoine-Olivier Pilon). He has severe ADHD, a problem when he is such a strapping lad on the brink of discovering sex, and he loves a drink, a smoke and a fight. Die rescues him from an institution where he has apparently started a fire, and she determines to make a new life for them both. But boy, is he a handful, constantly swearing, eyeing up girls and unable to sit still to study.

Just to complicate matters, Die loses her job when her old boss, who she flirted with, is replaced by a battle-axe of a woman, so she moves the two of them into a cheap, grimy flat. There they squabble and Steve dabbles in petty stealing, until into their lives comes Kyla (Suzanne Clement), a seemingly kindly neighbour. She is a former teacher so traumatised by an unspecified event that she has a severe speech impediment, a stammer and stutter. She and Die become unlikely friends – Kyla is painfully shy, conservatively dressed and nervous, Die is brash, brassy, loud, fag permanently on her lips and tattoos proudly displayed. A glass of chardonnay is all it takes for them to bond, then Kyla appears to lose her stammer when talking to Steve. She begins to tutor him, and the boy responds to her gentle manners, but his past is always going to catch up with him.

This is melodrama writ large, with Dolan’s camera getting literally into people’s faces, especially Steve’s when he has one of his many fits, saliva spurting, eyes bulging, swear words firing out of him like someone with Tourette’s. Yet somehow the film slowly weaves its spell; his helplessness, Die’s overbearing motherly love, and Kyla’s quiet concern, all forming an intricate emotional web. Mommy, as the title suggests, tips towards hints of incest. Steve constantly tests his mother’s love and throws a hissy fit when she has a date with another man. Equally there is a key moment when he taunts Kyla and she responds devastatingly, hinting that his illness may have been set off by an emotional trauma involving his father.

If it all sounds a little overbearing and full-on, well, it is. There are probably a couple of meltdown scenes too many, and sequences of Steve on his skateboard listening to music are overblown – the soundtrack is a little cheesy to say the least. A good 20 minutes could have been trimmed (as issue that’s been true of some of Dolan’s other movies), but these are minor complaints.

What really makes it a success are the stunning performances of the two women. Dorval as Die is a force of nature – all cheap skirts, thigh-length boots, tattoos and lipstick, a street fighter who believes her sexuality is her only weapon but who even doubts that, constantly referring to her flat chest. She is clearly no-one’s fool. She actually gets some work as a translator of children’s books, but with a fragile set-up as she and her son have, it’s never going to last. Clement as Kyla is equally tremendous, a nervous wreck of a woman – the source of her trauma is never revealed, although her husband is a creepy presence throughout. Plucking at her hair, pulling at her clothes, her basic decency shines through even when she is groping for a word.

Visually the film is a treat, the warm glow of Canada in the autumn a constant backdrop to the shouting, and Dolan has uses a 1:1 ratio to give the film a ‘square’ look, which, after a few minutes of adjusting, actually adds to the claustrophobic nature.

Overall verdict: Thoroughly gripping, harrowing look at life as a single mum with a troublesome teen which is much warmer and funnier than the theme would suggest. A film that takes its time then throws a huge emotional knockout blow.

Reviewer: Mike Martin

What we have here is an action vehicle for Sean Penn which may or may not turn into a franchise. On the surface this film may seem like a thinking man’s action thriller but in reality it’s not and the trailer gave a lot away. Some of you may see the twists coming and be able to guess the overall narrative mystery, but it’s probably best to just go along with the ride.

The plot revolves around Jim (Penn), a former bodyguard / hired militant / assassin whose past is catching up with him. Eight years after assassinating a target in Africa, his life is under threat and he must travel to London, Barcelona and Gibraltar to seek out former colleagues and unravel the mystery of who wants him dead.

As always, I don’t want to give away the whole plot but if you are a fan of action thrillers then you know what to expect. This film has a European Luc Besson feel, no surprise as is directed by Pierre Morel, who previously helmed Taken (2008), which is a good film but really overrated in my opinion.

It takes elements from the Bond franchise, including various locations, guns, a girl and a classic sports car. Although the best comparison to this film is the Bourne trilogy (2002 – 2007) as we have an overarching mystery, various locations, the effects of killing, and a bit of shaky-cam action sequences mixing precision hand-to-hand combat and shootouts. However this film isn’t as good.

One criticism I had was with the editing of the fight sequences. You couldn’t really see the combat due to tight framing and quick cuts, but in contrast when someone got shot you could see it in all its full brutal glory. My issue is that guns are worse than fists or knives, but as with a lot of Hollywood films guns are seen as tame as you can distance yourself from the target. This however does not apply to the whole film as we do get some rather grotesque shots, especially in the final fight.

But like The Dark Knight (2008), all of the action sequences are derived from the plot and don’t feel out of place or needless. This is one of the film’s strengths. Whilst not really original, the strong story and good script keeps the narrative going and doesn’t sag.

The big reveal is predictable and it’s little surprise from the opening that Jim’s girlfriend Annie (Trinca) gets together with Felix (Bardem) creating a love triangle of sorts. However the relationship between Jim and Annie is an element I found to be nicely put together, dealing with hearts from the past and how jealousy can blind.

This film shows the long term damage and effects of conflict and corporate greed on the people on each side and is another of its strengths.

Sean Penn shows off a body that has spent many an hour in the gym and thankfully still has his acting chops. Nowadays we like our action stars to be flawed but wise. Middle-aged actors definitely convey this, just take Liam Neeson.

Like in Elysium (2013), Jim has an illness which gets worse as the film progresses and adds to his vulnerability. This illness is explained as a result of post-traumatic stress and as expected hinders him at the worst possible moments. However this Illness isn’t referenced at the end and is an open plot point for a possible sequel.

Javier Bardem is unfortunately underused in this film. He is a master of expression and is great in everything I’ve seen him in. As Jim’s frenemy he unfortunately plays second fiddle and does the best with his character. The same can be said for Idris Elba’ DuPont. I won’t disclose his character but he owns every scene he’s in. Unfortunately there aren’t many of these. Jasmine Trinca is good as Annie and plays above the average Bond girl archetype. Ray Winstone even turns up too.

In regards to the cinematography it looks like a Bourne film but could have had some nicer establishing shots of the locations. A nice touch was to open the film with a news montage explaining the conflict in the Congo over natural resources. This technique is always effective as it makes the story more real, unless they are using a segment featuring Piers Morgan.

I noticed Amazon Prime in the opening credits and it’s interesting to see that online services are making their way to the big screen. No surprise seeing how big Netflix and others are and the quality of its original content.

In a nutshell this film is an entertaining mystery which doesn’t really add anything new, but is perfectly watchable. I was a bit concerned that the trailer may have given it all away, but I forgot various key plot points exposed in the trailer, and unfortunately have to say that this film is pretty forgettable too.

Overall Verdict: Entertaining enough but not what it hoped to be. Strong performances from the cast, but nothing overall original or memorable.

Reviewer: George Elcombe

What struck me immediately with this film was that it was well beyond your standard horror/comedy. Ryan Reynolds gives one of his best performances in what is one of my favourite films of the year so far. The Voices tells the story of Jerry, a sweet and likeable fellow from the small American town of Milton. Jerry seems innocent enough, but as the film develops his troublesome schizophrenia comes to cause some serious trouble.

Written by Michael R. Perry and directed by Marjane Satrapi, The Voices starts with Jerry in his new job at the Milton Fixture and Faucet’s factory. Early on we can tell he is not quite like his other workers, but is still cheerful and makes efforts to be liked by his new colleagues. There is an office party and his psychiatrist (an early warning bell!), played by Jacki Weaver, encourages him to socialise and make new friends.

Jerry develops a crush on his co-worker Fiona (Anna Kendrick) and asks her on a date. Unfortunately, it is at this point that things take a somewhat sinister turn. Accidently killing her on the way to take her home, we begin to realise that Jerry is incredibly mentally unstable. This is further confirmed when Jerry begins to talk to his two pets at home – the sweet and kindly dog Bosco, and the terrifyingly evil cat, Mr. Whiskers (all excellently voiced by Reynolds). These two characters represent the good and evil in Jerry’s head, and where most of people have a clear sense of right and wrong; Jerry’s voices have a much stronger impact on his decisions. Bosco keeps reassuring Jerry that he is a ‘good boy’ as long as he makes the right decisions, whereas Mr. Whiskers plainly tells Jerry (in his Scottish accent!) that the only way he can feel truly alive is to keep killing! Unfortunately for Jerry’s co-workers, that’s exactly what he keeps doing.

The Voices, is really a fantastic piece of cinema. The cinematography reflects Jerry’s dual personality and is bright and lush when he is off his medication, but dark, claustrophobic and sickly when he comes back on the medication – a time when his true reality is revealed. In this way we are given an insight into his world, and the struggle that he has in dealing with his mental illness. The writing is great, and keeps you guessing as to which way Jerry is going to go – good or evil? Even though Jerry is clearly a psychotic killer, you can’t help but empathise with his character; there is a true sense that you want him to make the right decisions.

It has some classic horror “don’t go in there!’ moments, where we fear for the safety of the other characters, only for Jerry to suddenly act benevolent and harmless. There are also some cleverly shot gore-moments, similar to something you might see in Dexter, where Jerry makes interesting use of a meat cleaver. However even with all the horrifying moments there is a vein of comedy that keeps the audience giggling. Fiona ultimately ends up as a severed head in Jerry’s fridge, but the whole time keeps chatting to Jerry in the flirtiest and most charming way – utterly bizarre!

Overall verdict: There is a lot to be said about The Voices – the writing is witty, funny, and unpredictable and gives insight into the mind of the deranged. Ryan Reynolds gives one of his best performances, with the voices of his cat and dog reason alone to see the film – and even through all the horror, to still laugh and feel empathy for the character is a testament to great direction by Marjane Satrapi. Definitely a must see.

Reviewer: Kevin van der Ham

With the imminent release of Thomas Vinterberg’s new version of Thomas Hardy’s classic tale Studio Canal have, slightly cruelly, re-released this 1967 version. Cruelly because the new version will do well to come anywhere near close to this fantastic, dark retelling of Hardy’s brutal story. It’s almost a perfect storm, all the actors were at their peak, the director was on top form and even the mistakes he made were covered by his photographer Nicolas Roeg – now whatever happened to him?

Many film fans will have already seen this version on various formants, so why fork out your hard-earned to see it on the big screen? Several reasons. It has a harvest festival scene that has been re-inserted after being lost, which adds yet more texture to the story. Roeg has overseen the clean-up job, which reveals he not only has a great eye but also a deep understanding of the look of Hardy’s world. All too often it is portrayed as pretty, but Roeg understood that this is a land that pulls hard on its inhabitants, it can be bleak and unforgiving as well as beautiful. He also understands how to shoot its characters – Oak, poor man, is never seen in anything other than sludge brown with a matching background. It’s as if he could throw himself into the sea and still come out looking beige. The sequence when his dog virtually destroys his livelihood in a moment of madness is stunningly shot and soul-destroyingly sad in equal measure.

But the main reason for seeing it again is simply because it is just so damn good. Christie is the stubborn Bathsheba, cursed with a beauty that attracts attention from three suitors. Oak (Bates) is the simple shepherd who offers her a solid, if unexciting life on his farm, while Boldwood (Finch) can offer her far more as the owner of a fine piece of adjoining property, but there may be a reason he has never married before. Into this mix comes Stamp as Sergeant Troy, a force of nature, dashingly handsome and with many a dark secret who sweeps Bathsheba off her feet.

Stamp and Christie may not be in retrospect the finest actors ever to have walked this land but here they are just perfect and understand their roles to a tee. Stamp’s seduction of Bathsheba with a demonstration of his sword skills – yet, metaphor alert – is one of the most memorable sequences in British cinema history, a whirring blur of movement, colour and sound that matches Hardy’s equally stunning prose in the book. Here’s a secret though – this whole sequence, perhaps 10 minutes in length, was not directed by Schlesinger, who apparently couldn’t stand Stamp. Instead Roeg took Stamp and Christie off at the end of a day’s shooting to shoot the sequence, and when Schlesinger saw it he had no choice but to include it in his film.

The supporting roles are equally important and yet again they are spot-on. Troy, the feckless, flaky show-off who appears to have won the battle for Bathsheba, has a dark secret, his love for the tragic, brittle Fanny (Prunella Ransome), and when she reappears in his life the results are almost unbearably moving. It’s a tribute to Schlesinger that Hardy’s world can be cruel in the extreme, yet there is never a moment when the story isn’t totally gripping. As for that new version, all I can say is best of luck to everyone involved – you’ll need it.

Overall verdict: Seminal 1960s slice of British cinema which tells Hardy’s superb tale with a precision and passion rarely matched since. Unmissable, and thoroughly enjoyable.

Reviewer: Mike Martin