Ralph is just a poor arcade bad guy, sick of his everyday job of wreckin’ in the realm of Fix-it Felix jr., he wants nothing more than to be accepted as a good guy and live among the game folk. In order to do this Ralph goes ‘turbo’ and crosses into the many arcade games through game central in order to achieve a medal and become the hero.

Wreck-It Ralph at times feels like a rehash of some of Disney/Pixar’s great CG animated blockbusters, often taking plot points and ideas from the likes of Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and other Pixar classics. Despite this it does bring something new to the party, and that’s the world of gaming. This is used as a great tool for the adults and maybe even older teens. Most of the younger audiences will go for the more basic laughs, while the older generation will enjoy seeing characters from classic arcade and console games from throughout the years. There are the superstars such as Sonic, Super Mario and Street Fighter, as well as more cult games like Q-Bert and Tapper.

Visually, as with all of Disney’s offerings, Ralph is a treat for the eyes, from the 8-bit stylings of the opening credits to the eye for detail within each game world that Ralph stumbles into. There are subtle yet clever differences within each world that make each transition a pleasure to watch. Be it the juddering game folk of Fix-It Felix to the clever use of Grand Central Station as a model for the film’s ‘Game Central’. The nods to game culture and pop culture in general come thick and fast throughout the film and will be nice for the adults to chuckle at while leaving the kids oblivious.

The cast is a strong who’s who of American comedy stars, from veterans like John C. Reilly as Ralph and Sarah Silverman as his glitchy sidekick, Vanellope to Jane Lynch of Glee fame and 30 Rock’s Jack McBayer. They all bring their individual comedy quirks to their characters, but Alan Tudyk as King Candy really takes it to that extra level, creating a laugh with almost every line.

Ralph’s major flaw is it gets lost within its middle act. Ralph reaches the colourful, candy filled world of racing car game, Sugar Rush, and the plot starts to lose itself, much like Ralph losing his hero’s medal in a chocolate mud pit. Ralph’s quest for approval as a good guy takes a backseat to make way for Vanellope’s back story and at times it feels as if the writers are trying to squeeze in as many good value messages as the entire Disney back catalogue combined.

With its nods to gaming classics and the many homages to classic arcade and console games, Wreck-It Ralph is a great family film. With enough slapstick and bright colours to keep the kids happy and the usual clever nods for the adults now and again, it is another impressive if slightly recognisable CGI animated venture from Disney.

Overall Verdict: Not a classic like Toy Story or Monster Inc., but Wreck-It Ralph has enough to make it stand out from the crowd, with a great voice cast and enough gaming culture references to please even the nerdiest of nerds.

Reviewer: Gareth Haworth

This film has been released 23 years after the untimely death (or not, if you look at his lifestyle) of Graham Chapman. The Film is not calling itself A Monty Python film, but a Graham Chapman film, and after watching it you might understand why.

The synopsis: in 1989 Chapman – ‘a freeloading bastard’ (according to John Cleese at his funeral) sadly ceased to be! ‘E’s expired and gone to meet ‘is maker! ‘E’s kicked the bucket, ‘E’s shuffled off ‘is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible!! – OK enough Parrot Sketch quotes already!! (which he co-wrote with John Cleese)

The bizarre fact about the film is that Chapman actually narrates his own biography on screen 23 years after he selfishly popped his clogs, this being due to that fact that previously undiscovered audio tapes were uncovered. The film itself is a hybrid of many different talents, three directors, 14 different animation companies, as well as the original autobiography being credited to six authors who helped co-write it!

The result, unfortunately and unsurprisingly, is that the collective effort appears fractured and disjointed, the only common thread are the highlights of Chapman’s life narrated by the man himself. Whilst unique anarchic humour and groundbreaking animation were synonymous with The Python Team, the film fails to excite or titillate and unfortunately does not match the higher echelons of humour that the Python team reached.

The most interesting and redeeming feature the film offers is the autobiography itself, where we learn of Chapman’s debauched lifestyle (70% gay – his own calculation) and his openness about his alcoholism. Some of the best animated sequences are the rousing musical numbers Sit On My Face and the hotel room sex scene, where the mother of a woman he picks up in an elevator watches her daughter having sex with Chapman, whilst on the phone and giving him the thumbs up. Some of the sketches are pure Python, but some others just don’s work. Why are the Python team represented by talking monkeys? This overdone sequence just didn’t work on any levels for me personally.

The film itself, like the aforementioned Python movies, often borders on the surreal, with fantasy sequences including phallic shaped spaceships (Very Flesh Gordon) but why use Cameron Diaz to voice Freud? One thing I did notice is that all the Python team are represented and add cameo voiceovers, with the notable exception of Eric Idle. There’s also the odd piece of Python footage thrown in for good measure.

In summary the film makes for a good accompaniment to the autobiography, but it doesn’t really work and often appears chaotic and shambolic – and not in a good way. It’s a bit like a collage showcasing the animators rather than truly paying homage to the talent that was Chapman.

Overall Verdict: The film is certainly not a complete turn off and I feel I have been opened up to the genius and madness of Graham Chapman, and I’m thoroughly glad I watched. The movie should appease the appetite of Python/Chapman fans, but not necessarily stretch beyond the student audience.

Reviewer Stephen Sclater

 

Biopics seem to very much to be the flavour of the week at the moment. With the Oscar nominated and highly regarded Lincoln, and the Psycho expose that is Hitchcock. Hyde Park on Hudson takes a very similar route. Rather than going for an epic birth-to-death biopic, these films take a significant microcosm of events and display them on screen.

Hyde Park on Hudson is based loosely on a collection of letters and diaries left by FDR’s distant cousin, Daisy, telling of her connection with FDR and how over several years they became rather close. What could have been a tell all tale of sordid affairs comes off as a rather comical and charming film, if slightly muddled. Hyde Park on Hudson’s problem is the parallel story of King Bertie and Queen Elizabeth’s visit to FDR’s mother’s house, which is an attempt by shy Bertie to get the Americans to help us out during World War II.

As a result many will almost see parallels with the Award behemoth that was The King’s Speech, a film that dealt with a set of events that occurred not too long after the events in Hyde Park on Hudson.

The charm of the film is exuded by the bucket load from Bill Murray playing FDR. His portrayal isn’t the best but he definitely brings that Murray charm to the role. The cast is impressive, with Olivia Williams playing FDR’s wife Eleanor and giving a solid performance. The film’s star has to be Laura Linney though who plays Daisy, a shy woman who is propelled into the life of her long lost relative who over the span of the films events becomes a crouch, someone FDR can call too in his time of need. The more intimate scenes are dealt with respectfully and come off as a cheeky wink and nothing more. The film does have some slightly dark moments but these are suggested rather than rammed home and the overall feeling of the film is rather light.

The cinematography of the film at times is fantastic. Director Roger Michell regularly features great tracking shots full of rich greens and open vistas – at this point it’s worth mentioning that although the historical events of the film took place in the US, all of the film was in fact shot in the U.K. These shots contrast greatly with the busy overcrowded sequences within FDR’s mother’s house and you can see why an ailing old president sought solace within the quiet countryside.

Hyde Park on Hudson is unfortunately all charm and not too much substance. The film is enjoyable with a strong take on an important event in both US and UK history, but even so at times it feels rather throwaway. It’s a lost midsummer night rather than anything of significant weight and importance. The events in the film are often played too much for comedic charm and you don’t really feel as if these great characters of history were more than comedic elements, especially in regards to King George and Queen Elizabeth.

Overall Verdict: A charming little film with an impressive attempt at telling a historical event in the most lighthearted of ways. Hyde Park on Hudson despite losing focus at times is still a throughly enjoyable film.

Reviewer: Gareth Haworth

After years of being compared to her Dad David’s films, Jennifer Lynch decides to give up and just make a film in his shadow. While Chained is by no means a total success it has the look and feel of a classic ‘Lynchian’ film, and at times is as disturbing as anything David has made.

Unlike a David Lynch film however this is more of a classic horror/serial killer story. Vincent D’Onofrio is Bob, a dull, podgy taxi driver with a weird lisp who kidnaps passengers, rapes and murders them with a knife and keeps their bodies buried under his creepy house.

When Bob kidnaps a woman (Julia Ormond) and her young son, he kills her but decides to keep the boy as a slave. He renames the boy Rabbit, and forces him to clean and cook while he continues his killing spree. The boy tries to escape, Bob responds by chaining him up. Bob is obsessed with keeping souvenirs from his victims, and Rabbit has to put the cuttings from the papers into a scrapbook, as well as organising their personal effects. There is even one scene where the pair play top trumps with the ages of the dead girls.

Slowly Bob makes the decision to coach Rabbit into some serial killing of his own. He buys the boy books on anatomy, asking him to identify exactly how his victims have died. The boy learns quickly but simply refuses to kill anyone. His reason to Bob? ‘You’re better at it than me’.

Eventually Bon forces Rabbit to go into the outside world and pick a victim, bring her home and rape and murder her. He picks a girl (Conor Leslie), but the film ends with a twist which frankly undoes a lot of the work of the first, grisly, awful first 70 minutes.

As a profile of a serial killer, Chained is utterly compelling and appallingly gripping. Bob is a classic weird loner, his fat body, disorienting lisp and poor personal hygiene giving him the feel of a sad loser, until he jumps into his favourite sport. His is the best portrayal of the drabness of the life of a serial killer since Henry – Portrait of a Serial Killer. His relationship with the boy grows in a creepily paternal way, and they do develop a kind of bond, even though Rabbit is clearly utterly traumatised by his life.

His house is where the comparisons with Lynch senior are strongest. It’s a headache-inducing interior, with drab browns and disgusting pinks lit only by dull lamps and the permanent glow of an analogue TV. Some of the rooms look like a particularly gruesome prison or torture chamber, and the basement is obviously beyond shocking. Thankfully the story lets Lynch’s camera wander outside sometimes, for what feels like fresh air, but even then Los Angeles looks like a neon-lit dark nightmare, noir at its bleakest. Clearly that matches the mood of the story.

Overall verdict: A classic noir serial killer story which looks fantastic, but ultimately is spoiled by a melodramatic ending which slightly spoils what has occurred before. At times this is stomach-churning stuff and always powerful, with the performances matching the mood throughout.

Reviewer: Mike Martin

There’s been huge controversy over Kathryn Bigelow’s use of torture scenes in her hunt for bin Laden movie, and her response is always “It happened – deal with it”. The trouble is not the use of torture scenes in themselves – they were an integral part of the story – it’s the fact she seems to have become distracted by the controversy and forgotten to make a cohesive narrative.

The first part of the movie jumps right into the debate, portraying waterboarding and other tortures as Jessica Chastain’s CIA agent Maya is thrown into the reality of hunting bin Laden. The problem is not just that she seems to go along with it – although eventually she does – it’s that the movie then takes an age to get anywhere afterwards. Scene after scene of Maya sitting at a computer staring at a blue screen, with the odd interrupting phone call, does not riveting cinema make.

Even when what’s at stake here is so high, it’s a strangely underwhelming, unexciting experience. Bigelow’s intention is no doubt to show the painstaking process of tracking down Bin Laden’s courier, and therefore him, but it becomes a tedious, repetitious piece of cinema. She finally identifies a man she believes to be Bin Laden’s courier and her team track the man across crowded pavements and through busy streets.

When we finally get to the last act, the killing of bin Laden by a group of SEALs, the actual shooting is almost an anti-climax, and the uneasy tone continues – female shooting victims are justified and glossed over with a shrug of a camouflaged shoulder, while Bin Laden is barely glimpsed.

It’s a shame as there is so much talent here. Chastain deserves her Oscar nomination for a tremendous portrayal of agent Maya, constantly banging her head against a brick wall, trying to use technology to find Bin Laden but continually being frustrated. Her feelings about using torture are never actually discussed, even though she is in the room when it happens several times, but her part makes more sense when trying to persuade big wigs that Osama is in Pakistan. Pale skin stretched across her bony face, she looks washed out at the beginning and positively exhausted at the end, and her steely determination is never in doubt. Bigelow never stoops to giving her a cheap joke either, it’s a laugh-free performance.

As Bigelow showed in The Hurt Locker, she can handle an action sequence with the biggest of big boys – the final sequence is brilliantly done technically, with night vision goggles and torches making the grubbiness of what is happening all too real. Nominations for Editing and Sound are well deserved.

The supporting cast is strong too, especially Jennifer Ehle as a doomed co-CIA worker who believes she has made a breakthrough, and James Gandolfini who has to justify the raid to the President himself. Joel Edgerton improves his case as one of the finest actors in cinema at the moment as the chief SEAL in charge of the daring raid, while Mark Strong never quite overcomes a dreadful wig. Hard as they try though they cannot thoroughly justify what is going on at the heart of the movie, which is strange.

Overall verdict: A weirdly unsatisfying movie experience on lots of levels. Fine performances and technical excellence never overcome a sense of paralysis in the script.

Reviewer: Mike Martin

It’s become something of a tradition for countries to tell the world the life story of their most notorious criminals in film form. Australia gave us the unforgettable Chopper, France had the truly epic Mesrine and England’s most memorable recent crime biopic was the unique Bronson. Now Love, Honour and Obey director Ray Burdis has given one of Scotland’s most notorious wrong ‘uns the crime flick treatment with The Wee Man, the story of diminutive Glasgow hard-man Paul Ferris, played with grit by Martin Compston. Unfortunately it’s not only the film’s protagonist that’s wee; this is a small scale film with limited ambitions that prevent it being anything that hasn’t been seen many times before.

Ferris is a well-known figure among crime aficionados thanks to his three (yes three) best-selling memoirs and the film aims to adapt these charming stories of his rise through the Glasgow underworld with a minimum of embellishment. While the early scenes where the young Ferris stands up to bullies and realises he’s actually good quite at the whole violence thing are fairly gripping, it soon sets into a clichéd rut as he starts working for, then against notorious overlord Arthur Thompson (Patrick Bergin) and his loutish son Junior (Stephen McCole) and it becomes a standard gangster flick.

The film’s biggest problem is its lack of scope and flair. It was shot in London doubling for Glasgow and although Burdis’s decision to shoot everything tightly and without establishing shots can be seen as an attempt at some Mean Streets style claustrophobia it’s more likely just to disguise the location and makes the film feel very small scale. At one point Thompson tells Ferris “look out there, that’s Glasgow” but we don’t get to see it. It’s also shot in a bland, perfunctory fashion that prevents it from having any kind of distinctive personality and instead makes feel like a tepid TV drama.

Despite these limitations the cast are giving it their utmost. Although Compston has played this kind of role before he proves totally capable of carrying the film on his shoulders and John Hannah is more interesting than he’s been in years as a superb weasel of a rival gangster. Denis Lawson is truly memorable as Ferris’ wearily decent father who acts as a moral compass in the earlier scenes but their interesting relationship is essentially abandoned later on.

Ultimately The Wee Man just never really becomes interesting and as a British gangster film is just another entry in an overloaded sub-genre.

Overall Verdict: The fact that it’s set north of the border is all that separates The Wee Man from the typical British gangster flicks that inundated cinemas about ten years ago. It has a fantastic cast giving earnest performances but offers nothing new or interesting.

Reviewer: Adam Pidgeon