Film Reviews by MD

I was surprised I had not heard about this film when I saw it on the CP list, but 20 minutes in I understood why - it is dire!

The whole set up was ridiculous, and no-one seemed to believe in anything they were doing. The pairing of Brosnan and Hayek worked really well in "After the Sunset", but here there was no chemistry, and the whole persona of Brosnan's character was a real turn off.

I tried to believe Jessica Alba was worth hanging on for, but it was all pretty excruciating. Needless to say, comedy was in short supply, too.

Definitely one for masochists only.

Michael Moore may not be to everyone's taste, but I have always thought his films well worth watching, and this one is no different. He is getting on a bit now, and at times he can be very irritating, yet there is so much good stuff in this film that you can easily put aside any minor gripes.

Essentially the film looks at all the best things about society in Europe, and compares them to all the worst things about society in America, so clearly there is a strong bias in the presentation, but so much of what he reveals about both Europe and the USA is truly eye-opening and enlightening. Britain gets not a single mention, which is good because it allows you to cast a critical eye on our own society; perhaps unsurprisingly, I felt we came out 50/50, not as good as the best Europe has to offer, but certainly nowhere near as bad as the USA either.

The editing is brilliant, juxtaposing startlingly contrasting images to make his point, and the languid humour is still there in abundance, if a bit more forced than previously. It can feel a touch laboured towards the end, yet in many ways this is also the most important part as here he does a good job of showing the growing influence and importance of women in shaping the world, how Europe is leading the way in turning back thousands of years of male domination to create fairer, more humane societies.

Just like "Bowling for Columbine", I think this is an important film at a critical time, and I would definitely recommend it if you have any interest at all in knowing more about the world we live in. If nothing else, you'll be absolutely amazed by the Finns speaking English!

When you consider that this is the third film in the series, things really should be getting a bit tired now, but amazingly this new adventure comes across almost just as fresh as the original, and it certainly has a lot of other animated features beaten in managing to be a great load of fun whilst also having a bit of depth and soul.

Part of this success must be down to a very experienced set of stars doing the voice work because the characters seem to have more to them than the usual cardboard cutouts you get, but also credit to the screen writers for a story that holds up well even in its weaker moments and to the animators for the great visuals - the colours are fantastic, and the realisation of the Chinese landscape is incredibly evocative.

Of course there are less successful aspects - I found it a very 'wave and trough-like' experience, with really cracking scenes followed by somewhat dull or trite ones - and perhaps the idea of Jack Black's panda being a complete schmuck who still conjures up moments of brilliance to save the world IS getting long in the tooth, but for the most part both I and the two under tens I watched it with were royally entertained. Well done, Dreamworks, for not getting left behind in the increasingly high quality world of animated movies - perhaps now you can come up with a new idea that's just as good!

Drones are all the rage at the moment, and this film puts them centre stage in the war on fundamentalist terror groups.

The central idea is solid, focusing on a mission in which drone surveillance is first used to help track and capture two major suspects, and which then becomes upgraded to using the drone's weapons to kill the suspects. It is a taut and suspenseful drama, particularly in the first half as we switch back and forth between the many commanders, soldiers, agents, politicians and drone operators involved in the mission.

Where the film falls down in my opinion is (a) by giving far too much weight and screen time to the story of a single innocent girl's fate, and (b) by going on and on in laborious detail about the pros and cons of killing a few innocent bystanders to save hundreds more from suicide bombers. I actually got annoyed in the second half because the plotting was so blatantly manipulated to get the girl into the story, and because, while the arguments put forward by all the different protagonists were compelling, they did not belong in a movie. In trying to be fair-minded and show the many faceted problems of targeting terrorists from 20,000 feet up, the film lost its pace and tension, and became overdone to the point of tedium.

So, full marks for tackling a very current subject, and for at least not dumbing it down in the way movies usually do, but only three stars because ultimately the movie fails to maintain its early promise, and becomes a little too flawed and overly melodramatic to be fully satisfying.

WARNING: Contains spoilers

I knew nothing about this film before renting it, but like a couple of other recent movies that received little or no attention from the multiplexes, it turned out to be far better than most of the blockbusters you see there.

The film starts slowly, and one major criticism I have is that it does tend to drag a bit in several places throughout the movie, but there is enough mystery and intrigue to keep you interested until the story really starts firing on all cylinders.

It is not a particularly original story, having antecedents in "Starman" and Spielberg's "ET" or "Close Encounters", but it is done from a new angle on the idea, and enough innovations and twists to make it seem fresh. The acting is virtually first rate from all concerned, not least the boy in the lead role, and there is a very satisfying cynicism from the director, who subtly critiques the way that religious sects and the US military would respond to an alien life form and anyone associated with it.

The fairly predictable ending is handled as well as could be expected, but by then you are kind of rooting for the underdog, as it were, and the final shot will certainly test you: only if you have really been paying attention will it make any sense.

My verdict: definitely worth a look if you want something rather different and more satisfying than most mainstream fare.

Ever since Disney acquired Pixar, and in particular the talents of John Lasseter, their animated movies have gone up several notches in quality, and this is the best work from the studio in a long time.

Everything you always had in a Pixar movie is there: the great plot, a wonderful array of colourful and engaging characters, some absolutely brilliant sight gags plus loads of laugh-out-loud moments and, most of all, that ability to appeal to both adults and kids in equal measure. In short, it is a lot of FUN.

As another reviewer has pointed out, though, where Disney still falls short is in banging you over the head with their holier-than-thou moralising. Pixar had the moralising too, sure, but they did it with ingenuity and subtlety; Disney insists on putting it full frontal, with no holds barred. The result here is that the film feels slightly heavy-handed beneath the fun; as an adult, it drags, and for the kids I bet it washes over them mostly unnoticed anyway.

Overall, definitely worth a look, especially if you want a genuine family film, but not quite the full five stars yet from old Walt!

I could not decide whether to give this film the thumbs up or thumbs down its title suggested, hence my own review title. The central idea of focusing on a big Hollywood "fixer" around which to build a movie that is both a homage to Hollywood's past and a critical spoof of some of its more famous productions seemed reasonable enough, but what resulted was a very mixed bag.

The script was far too variable, sometimes witty and enlightening, sometimes plain daft, and a stupid plot about communists in the system just never clicked, but individual performances and scenes were pretty good. Josh Brolin appeared as if out of nowhere to give a solid performance in the lead role, and Alden Ehrenreich looks a real find - it's damn difficult to give a convincing portrayal of bad acting, but he did it with charm and aplomb.

Some individual set pieces, such as the sailors in the bar dance routine were clever and entertaining, and it gave you a bit of an insight into how Hollywood worked in its "heyday", so all in all it was worth watching, even if not one of the Coen brothers more memorable efforts.

Having watched the opening twenty minutes, I was in two minds as to whether to stop the film right there or struggle on. It was a terrible opening - rushed in the pacing, unclear at setting out either the plot or the characters, and punctuated with several totally gratuitous and feeble sex scenes.

I decided to struggle on, but at the 45 minute mark nothing had improved and I gave up. Not even Jennifer Lawrence could save this clunker.

Just occasionally, a film comes along that really does seem like nothing you've seen before. This is just such a film.

It's about time travel, it's about boy meets girl, it's about a hitman and a terrorist, all of which are not exactly new in the movies, but the story itself, and the way it unfolds, are completely original and not at all what you might expect.

I suspect some folks may find it too complicated or too pretentious to really enjoy it, but I thought it was a really neat idea with excellent performances (in particular by Sarah Snook), a no-nonsense, provocative script and sharp direction. When you get to the end, you just have to watch it again to see all the clues throughout, and to appreciate that it truly is a very clever and engaging little movie.

Definitely recommended if you have an open mind and want something way out of the usual mainstream fare.

This is the third film in the "Divergent" series. If you have not seen the first two, don't even think of seeing this one; if you have seen the first two, whether you choose to see this will depend on how much of a masochist you are.

Overall, it is just about watchable because the cast do a great job of pretending they believe in it, but really the story is ludicrous and so many of the scenes are cliched and banal, a cinematic paint by numbers sort of thing. In what appears to me to be a trend in modern movies, the first half is better than the second. In the former there is at least some attempt to show real characters operating in semi-believable situations, but once the (obvious) truth is out and the protagonists are in a race against time to thwart the evil mastermind, it becomes just like puppets in a comic book, way too simplistic and rushed, with a believability factor of zero.

This is a two star movie through and through. And the fourth one is still to come!

Yes, it's easy to dismiss this as another lightweight rom-com about the eternal question, "Can a man and a woman be just friends?", but seeing it for the second time after a break of several years I actually thought it was rather better than many similar films.

When the story is not very original, you need a good script, good acting and imaginative direction to make a movie work, and this certainly has the first two, if a bit lacking in the third. I read that it's not funny or not romantic, but I beg to differ - much of the dialogue is very sharp and witty, especially from Adam Driver's character, and there are plenty of situations that most of us will recognise showing the twists and turns of attraction. Zoe Kazan is a very underrated actress, and Daniel Radcliffe does a great job of throwing off his Harry Potter image, so even if, as some suggest, the chemistry is not quite there, I think they portray a much more believable pair than you find in most rom-coms.

Bottom line is, sure, this is not an unforgettable piece of cinema, but it's still definitely worth a viewing. I enjoyed it a lot.

Amazingly, given its box office success, I came to this film knowing very little about it, so here's a selection of reactions:

- a bit of a recycled plot ("Castaway" in space) and so predictable an ending ("Apollo 13" redux)

- a fine first half, much wittier and more interesting than one would expect

- a less fine second half, when the Hollywood juggernaut syndrome took over and the believability factor plummeted

- a nice, nuanced performance from Matt Damon, everybody else more or less a cliche or cypher

- a very convincing portrayal of the Red Planet, CGI put to excellent use

- a pleasure to see a film that did not totally dumb down science to the point of inanity

So, overall, a reasonably successful effort that certainly works well 70% of the time, let down though by the things that are so often a problem in modern, US big budget movies that have to be "exciting", "emotional" and ridiculously gung-ho patriotic to boot.

After reading some very good reviews, and being an admirer of Ryan Reynolds's work the past few years, I was looking forward to this film, but it was a huge let down. There's nothing bad about it, really, but nor is there anything good - it's not original, it's not brilliantly played or directed, the story can't make up its mind whether it wants to be straight or a bit of a spoof, and quite frankly, I lost interest in the whole thing after no more than an hour. By all means see it if you want, but there are so many better films than this that warrant your time and money.

The worst thing about this film is that you've seen the formula many times already, the David v. Goliath true story a la "Erin Brockovich", "Schindler's List", "The Insider", etc. The second worst thing is that it is about American Football, hardly a riveting topic for most Brits.

Hopefully, you can ignore these two things, because if you do actually watch it, it is a great story, a very well scripted and clear, straightforward account of a little known scandal. Will Smith is the star, and he does a pretty good job of trying to break out of his usual style of role, but the great thing is you never think of him as the big Hollywood star in this film. It is an ensemble piece filled with good performances by a very mixed cast of lesser lights. Most notably, it is not all sweetness and light, and the ending is very poignant indeed.

I was engrossed throughout, and glad I decided to rent it despite mixed critics' reviews. Interestingly, after I had seen it I got my wife to watch it too, and she then recommended it to her dad and another friend. ALL of them were very positive in their reaction. That must say something!

There are only two possible reactions to this film: either you will find it an engrossing account of one of the great true stories of WWII, or you will find it a slick and shallow fudge that plays fast and loose with the truth.

Of course, it is actually both. The film takes tremendous liberties with the truth, and makes everything very glossy and wonderful, but it also tells a cracking story of real substance and historical importance.

Personally, I prefer to see its virtues. It is a story everyone should see, and so what if it's been "Hollywood-ized". It's informative and entertaining, full of star turns, and goes some way to redeeming the reputation of a man totally shafted by the very country he undoubtedly did more than almost anyone else to save.