Ted

Directed by: Seth Macfarlane

Starring: Seth Macfarlane, Mark Wahlberg and Mila Kunis

Plot: When John Bennett (Mark) wishes for the friend he never had, he soon gets his wish as his teddy bear "Ted" comes alive. However, as they both get older they soon may realise that a boy can't have a teddy bear for ever.

SPOILER ALERT - THE FOLLOWING REVIEW IS AWESOME...........
AND MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS

First of all I wanted to say that i'm sorry this article has taken so long to write.   I watched it the day it came out, but I have just been too busy but have finally managed to get around to writing it. From now on i'm going to try and post a review in the week I have seen a movie. Even tho this review is a lot shorter than I normally write I just wanted to get it done but promise when I eventually get to the cinema next time I will write a more in depth review and not leave it as long to post it.

Comedy. Comedy is one of the genres that will always be given an unfair image in the fact that people say that a good comedy film is "a good comedy film but an OK film".  When people do this they are just being stupid as to make a good or even great film it needs to successfully fit into it's genre. For example a great drama needs to create drama, a great action film needs to show great action and a great comedy film needs to create great comedy. 

This was a good film. And from the creator of Family Guy and American Dad then we knew it would be. I also knew it would have terrific one liners and oh yes there were. The next paragraph will be one liner quotes from Ted to prove how funny the film was.

- Oh, where are my manners? Lori, this is Angelique, Heavenly, Charene, and Sauvignon Blanc. I love you girls. Y'know, somewhere out there are four terrible fathers I wish I could thank for this great night! 
- My daughter better still be alive you sick son of a bitch. 
- Chris Brown can do no wrong!
- I'll tell you what I got. Your wife's pussy on my breath.
- Or, or, or, maybe the floor is on the shit.
- Now if there's one thing you can be sure of, it's that nothing is more powerful than a young boy's wish. Except an Apache helicopter. An Apache helicopter has machine guns AND missiles. It is an unbelievably impressive complement of weaponry, an absolute death machine. 
- No matter how big a splash you make in this world whether you're Corey Feldman, Frankie Muniz, Justin Bieber or a talking teddy bear, eventually, nobody gives a shit. 


As you can see there are plenty of jokes in this film and amazing one liners. Especially the main characters of Ted and John who were the funniest pair in the film and proves from "the other guys" that Mark Wahlberg can do comedy. Ted was the right balance of sarcasm and humor and was the Teddy bear version of the Bad Santa character by Billy Bob Thornton. Whereas John was the naive child like character that had terrific moments and created chemistry with Ted which was great to see considering that Ted was animated (Even tho he is real to me).

However, although there were great lines in this film, it seemed for a comedy film that there were long periods from joke to joke so wasn't a continual flow and seemed too gappy in parts. Also, I thought they missed a trick with some of characters they had and although it is a comedy film there is still no excuse for not having a proper story line or having and developing other supporting characters.  If it flowed more with a few more jokes and less time between each joke instead of long periods with no jokes than I think it would have improved the film overall and would have been the funniest film this year and not second to 21 Jump Street.




The Good: "I tell you what I have, your wife's pussy on my breath"
The Bad: Seemed to have long jokeless periods
The Ugly: Not Enough From The Narrator (Not Saying Who He Is)

Rating: 3*

Double Feature

 - The Lorax + Ice Age: Continental Drift

In a double feature article I will be reviewing two films. I will mainly be doing this to save time if I have too many to do so will write smaller reviews on two films of the same genre. In this article I will be reviewing to highly anticipated animated films; The Lorax and the latest Ice Age film.

The Lorax

Directed by: Chris Renaud, Kyle Balda


Starring: Danny DeVito, Zac Efron and Taylor Swift


Plot: In a world where trees are the stuff of myths, one young boy discovers the past and the truth about The Lorax.


SPOILER ALERT - THE FOLLOWING REVIEW IS AWESOME...........
AND MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS


When my brother and I went to america early April we had the chance to see The Lorax but didn't!  Since then I have looked forward to the release of this film and couldn't wait to see it. I thought it looked brilliant even though i am not a fan of the work of the DR himself.


(You can tell where this is going) Sadly to say, I was disappointed by it. (You were right). For anyone who doesn't know the concept of The Lorax it is mainly to do about the environment which is so relevant to us right now since there is a massive push at the moment for saving the environment. This film had a lot of potential but just let me down.


I thought that The Lorax himself was amazing and the bears and the fish were hilarious. Especially the chubby bear - maybe because I could relate :)  Whenever they were on the screen it was funny. However, they are only used in cut scenes to show how the trees disappeared.  Because of this it felt like the main characters who had potential and the most room for development weren't shown enough as the story followed a young lad who finds out the truth so since he is being told about the Lorax.  If they scrapped the whole present and past stories and just focused on the Lorax and that story line then the film would have been a lot more consistent and a lot better.


As I mentioned about the consistency of the two story lines and the characters it didn't develop any of them and the one character that was developed "The Onceler" (as he was recapping his encounter of the Lorax to the young boy) wasn't the main character. If they just had that as the main story it would have showed more character development as well as scrap the pointless character and had more screen time for the best things in it. 


Was an OK film but was just one of the films I thought could have been spectacular but was just a let down. Still see it tho for the fish and the bears as you will agree with me!



The Good: The Lorax, The Fish and The Bears
The Bad: Seemed Very Short
The Ugly: Didn't Develop Anyone

Rating: 2.5*

Ice Age: Continental Drift

Directed by: Steve Martino and Mike Thurmeier


Starring: Ray Romano, John Leguizamo and Denis Leary


Plot: Manny, Diego and Sid are back for a fourth installment of the Ice Age franchise and this time, their mischief and shenanigans are on a continental per portion when they get separated from their family.  Using an ice berg as a ship they try and get back while running into dangerous sea pirates.


SPOILER ALERT - THE FOLLOWING REVIEW IS AWESOME...........
AND MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS


I have never really loved the ice age series.  I thought the films have always been good or OK but it isn't one of the better animated series.  With this film it was exactly what I expected from it, a few laughs, not amazing, not terrible but just good. This time it was better than average to be honest.


There were some entertaining bits but again the stars of the film weren't shown enough and these were some island hamster-like creatures who didn't talk, were cute as hell, and were absolutely hilarious.  Whatever they did was just funny, especially there Brave Heart impression. If these had their own film I would watch it, so I was sad and annoyed that similar to characters in the Lorax that  had a lot of potential they weren't in the film for that long. Another good performance is from Game of Thrones legend, Peter Dinklage who was a master sea pirate, Captain Gutt, and he made a convincing villain. He had a particularly good scene when he did a  song about himself which I thought was a pretty decent scene, probably one of the best in this film. I also enjoyed the scene with Scrat and his last nut scene which I just enjoyed. I have always loved the metaphor for Scrat, no matter how hard you try - YOU WILL NEVER GET WHAT YOU WANT!!!!!!!!!!


The three main characters were the same and I can't make my mind up if that is good or bad.  I mean they were exactly the same.  The only one who has ever changed is Diego in the first film who became part of the group it just seems like they didn't want to try anything new with them. I think a lot of the characters were predictable including the new daughter, Peaches and her best friend. And I had a hatred for the granny character, who is a stereotypical grumpy, disgusting old person who has a "made up" pet which turns out to be real.  SHOCK, SHOCK, SHOCK.  I knew  from the start that they would do this.


Overall, it's the same as the others. If you like the three others then go see this film as it's the same format, but if you were hoping for something different then brace yourself for nothing different. Again tho, it is worth a watch just for the brave heart hamsters (my new official name for them) and the menacing pirate Captain Gutt.




The Good: The Brave Heart Hamsters
The Bad: GRANNY = POINTLESS
The Ugly: The Brave Heart Hamsters Didn't Get More Time

Rating: 2.5*

The Dark Knight Rises

Directed by: Christopher Nolan


Starring: Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Tom Hardy, Anne Hathaway and Morgan Freeman


Plot: Eight years on after the dark knight, new terrorist Bane (Hardy) rises to create a new age of terror for Gotham city leaving the citizens wondering if batman will return and rise against this new enemy.


SPOILER ALERT - THE FOLLOWING REVIEW IS AWESOME...........
AND MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS


This review may be difficult to write as although the film was good and will have a high rating, the way it will sound is I rate the film very low which I don't. I just want to start off with my opinions on the first two films. The first one I thought was OK but nothing special, the acclaimed dark knight I thought was good - but didn't deserve the reputation it got saying how amazing it was. I found it slow and overrated. Like I said, it was good but not great. Although Heath Ledger was amazing. Now we come to this one. Some people are already saying the trilogy could be one of the greatest of all time, and that this film is one of the best films ever. I disagree, I thought it was good, very good, but again it doesn't deserve the hype it has already got.


Lets start with the good points before I say what I didn't like about it. And I don't want to appear that i'm completely against this film as I'm not at all, it was very good. Lets start off with the performances from the actors. Overall, the cast was great, and has always been great. Solid performances from the veterans of the trilogy such as Bale and Caine. However, the two main newbies stole it for me, one more than the other. But first Anne Hathaway or should I say Cat woman, besides looking like she was from most guys fantasies which she probably is she looked amazing and gave a good performance. She suited the persona of Cat woman more than other's who have tried the role. She looked in control but added very good emotional depth and story to her back ground. 


Now, if you've seen the film or not you will probably know who stole the show and that is the monster that is Tom Hardy. And I don't mean Bane is the monster!  Tom Hardy does actually look like a walking tank which anyone who have seen Bronson and the Warrior will know he is. As Bane I can say he gave my favorite performance out of any villain. And considering he is up there with ARNIE as Freeze it is hard. Seriously, considering he is up there with the performances of both Jokers from Heath Ledger and Jack Nicholson then you know how good he was. What did it for me?  The eyes!  You could hear when he spoke but since you couldn't see him talk you can tell how he felt just by his expressions and considering he didn't show much face that is very impressive. Batman has always given us great performances but I honestly think that Hardy is up there for Bane. Just plain outstanding.


One thing I loved, that it wasn't in 3D and still looked real and amazing. It just looked realistic and you couldn't tell that some of it was CGI like you can in others. It sounded amazing especially the soundtrack. Usually this isn't a subject many people discuss but in this the continuous use of the "prisoners chant" is amazing.  I Liked how they kept playing it and it just built and built up the tension. Very good choice of, music and when it was revealed that the chant meant rise - it tied the whole theme together with the rise of many characters as nearly every character in the film, good or bad, had to rise up for what they believed in which was a brilliant concept.


Another thing I want to praise is that Batman has always amazed me how it can be so dark but suitable for kids at the same time. In this case the darkest parts of the film involved Bane and the neck snapping he did, although it sounds dark the view always jilted away or didn't show you everything so kids would get the idea but not be horrified. I also want to praise how they didn't use any blood, I think in some movies it looks cheesy and tacky. In this film if people were shot it would just show them on the floor so you knew they were killed and it didn't need the blood making it more child friendly which was an excellent choice. The balance it had of darkness but still suitable for kids is a skill it has always had in this latest trilogy that has always surpassed marvel which has always been to child friendly in my opinion and has never mastered both.


A lot of the scenes in this film were brilliant, such as the battle between Bane and Batman surrounded by convicts and cops. But my favorite scene was so eerie and was just brilliant. It involved a choir boy singing the American national anthem, and that's all you could here bar talking. No music just silence. This eerie silence as the voice echoed around the cinema showing Bane taking over and realisation of what he is doing. Then the action just exploded, you could feel everything building up while the national anthem was going on. Was just a jaw dropping scene in my opinion.


Now, there were some things I didn't like about this film. The first which is similar to the Dark Knight is that it was slow in parts. I don't mind a build up, but in a film that long it needs to maintain attention and I just thought it had too many slow parts. The next few things that annoyed me are only minor and just my opinions. I didn't like the cameo of Scarecrow. He had no place in the film what so ever and could have been used to develop or show how the city had changed like the mayor or a police officer to show the change and influence Bane had not a character that Nolan keeps making a cameo. And the other thing that annoyed me is that I felt they kept purposely trying to make and force one liners down our throats in the hopes of creating another "why so serious".  I don't mind people obsessing over a quote and making it memorable like so many great films have them such as "Run Forrest Run" and "you had me at hello". But I hated how every line seemed that they were trying to force another movie one liner  out when it wasn't needed.


My final complaint is with the predictability of it, even with the "twist". For this bit i'm going to approach it as from my own point of view since I know the batman universe and an average Joe who wouldn't have seen it coming.  For myself, everything was predictable, I knew that Bane wouldn't be the master villain and the new love of Mr.Wayne, Miranda would be a bad guy, or bad girl. And since I knew that Ra's Al Ghul had a daughter when it showed the child I figured it would be her now known as Talia Al Ghul, and not Bane. Also I sussed out even before the film that they would end the film on the hint of Robin and - SHOCK they did.  So anyone who knew batman even not that well like myself won't be surprised by anything in the film. However, for the average Joe although it was still obvious about Miranda being a villain and that Bane wouldn't be the master of the plan, I think people would have been surprised about the reveal that the child was Miranda not Bane. But the Robin thing was still obvious.


Overall the film was very good and does deserve a lot of the credit it is getting especially for Hardy as Bane. I was impressed but I just don't think it as phenomenal as people are claiming it is and certainly isn't the greatest trilogy of all time. Does it deserve an Oscar nomination - yes, will it get one - yes, should it win - no.  It is a must see film but I just don't think it's as god like as it has been claimed to be.



The Good: Hardy, Hardy, Hardy
The Bad: Slow at parts
The Ugly: Predictable

Rating: 4*

The Amazing Spider-man 

Directed by: Marc Webb


Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans


Plot: Retelling of the spider man series. Peter Parker (Garfield - The actor not the cat) finds a clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared when he was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr.Curt Connors (Ifans), his farther's former partner and his teenage crush Gwen Stacy (Stone).


 Everyone loves spider man. Even those who pretend not to like spider man as they want to look cool, love spider man. Spider man has always been one of, if not the most iconic super hero of all time. Whether you remember spider man from the comics, the tv or the more recent spider man trilogy, spider man is a popular franchise with us all.   Appealing to kids and adult of all ages. Although the franchise was made by the comic books, many people today will remember it from the recent trilogy staring Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. 


The originally trilogy was a huge success and apart from the 3rd film, the others were pretty good.  So when Sony announced a re-visioning of spider man to create an amazing spider man film, people were skeptical as to whether it would work or just be another flop like the 3rd film.  As we know sometimes remaking a film or re-imagining a franchise can fail e.g. Rob Zombie's Halloween I and II. However, with the spectacular revising of the batman franchise with the Dark Knight trilogy it shows it can be done. And after all the speculation and negative feel towards the film, I have to say I was very impressed by it and thought it smashed all negativity towards it out of the water and showed that spider man isn't dead.


First of all I wanted to say that although I liked the first two spider man films I never took a liking to Tobey. After Andrew Garfield's performance I'm happy to say, Tobey who?  Garfield was outstanding in his performance of the web slinger himself. This is my nerd side getting out but Spider man in the comics and TV show is well known for his sarcasm and wit making him popular with kids because of his comedic side. When Tobey did his performance it butchered any of the wit of the character and created a wooden teary mess.  However, Garfield's charisma and sheer talent which was proven to us after the social network did the character the correct justice. He added emotional depth to the character when needed.  When in the film Peter Parker was quiet he still managed to show that there was always more to him by the facial expressions and movements he did. He added the comedic side very well and overall was a star performance.  After watching it, I felt it was such a good fit you couldn't imagine anyone else playing Spider man as well as he did. And yes we are all annoyed that ARNIE won't be revisiting the super hero genre after the oscar winning performance of Frost to play spider man but in the mean time Andrew Garfield is an excellent choice.


As well as a class performance from Garfield, Stone and Ifans gave great performances as well. Stone was far more likable and seemed like a more realist love interest in her performance of Gwen Stacey than the Kirsten Dunce performance of Mary Jane.  Stone seemed far more real and down to earth and had real good chemistry with Garfield and will be interesting to see how they progress it further without hopefully doing the whole marriage thing the others did. One thing the original trilogy had, yes even spider man 3, was great performances of the villains.  And this one doesn't disappoint as well.  I thought Ifans gave a good performance as the Lizard/ Dr.Connors. He portrayed one of the most common human faults brilliantly - Obsession.  Dr.Connors is obsessed with re growing his lost arm with lizard DNA and when pressured by the infamous OSCORP to come up with a cure for diseases he uses the serum he creates on himself with disastrous results - obviously. And guess what he turns into using lizard DNA, that's right. He becomes the Green Goblin. I'm kidding, of course he changes to the lizard but was interesting is that when he changed back into human form a few times Ifans showed the change in his character and his obsession in creating the perfect species and getting back what he lost.  Although his obsession made him lose more than his arm, his humanity.  Ifans did a convincing performance and I'm sure we won't be seeing the last of him. NO SPOILERS BUT STAY FOR THE ICONIC MARVEL AFTER CREDIT SCENE.


Speaking about iconic marvel scenes. It wouldn't be a marvel film without a cameo from the daddy him self, STAN LEE. And this cameo doesn't disappoint. This isn't really much of a spoiler so I'm going to say how awesome it was. But it was very awesome, it had Stan Lee as a librarian listening to classical music and sorting out books, not noticing spider man and the lizard being seven spades of shit out of each other behind him - classic.  


There were some great scenes in this film. Two I particularly liked were around Peter Parker learning about his powers. The first was him on the sub way waking up and by removing clothes with his sticky hands (sounds ruder than it is) and knocking people out while apologizing and not meaning to do any of it made for a funny scene of him first learning he has powers . Another scene I liked is rather than the stereotypical jumping roof top from roof top to develop his powers, he was at a shipping dock on his skateboard listening to music while climbing up walls while doing tricks and swinging from chains which I much preferred. Also I preferred that this spider man has to make his own web from OSCORPS strengthened web thread line instead of producing it himself but hey, I'm just a nerd.  However, with every film there are always some scenes that different people will like and won't like. And the one scene I didn't like is before the lizard heads to the OSCORP tower for his master plan he his parading around the city looking very gay with a tiny satchel around him throwing smoke every where like a cheesy terrorist instead of a terrifying lizard. Before people start calling me homophobic I'm not saying that every gay guy is a giant lizard with a satchel, just that every giant lizard with a satchel is gay.


And speaking of funny scenes or funny wholes in the film is that when Peter is getting into OSCORP he steels someone else's name badge and a few minutes later we see security taking the unfortunate kid who had his name stolen out of the building. So it seems that security is very very good in this massive company. Clearly they use the security just at the door as Peter Parker could walk into restricted sections and hacking doors without anyone noticing. Tut Tut. However, karma did bite him in the ass, or should I say in the neck in the form of a spider. That will teach that trouble maker.


While being a bit apprehensive about watching the amazing spider man as not knowing if it would be another flop or not, I knew that the CGI would be amazing - PUN DEFINITELY INTENDED. And it was amazing, some of the shots were incredible including when he was swinging around the streets and the fight scenes, the effects were brilliant.  I did think thou gh there were too many of the same shots, as the first time was awesome then again and again I was thinking "Yes we know they look good but what else can you show us apart from the same shot" and I wasn't a fan of the first person shot that they showed in the trailer that I prayed they wouldn't show in the film as thought it looked cheap and tasteless. I'm not a big fan of 3D as think it was only introduced to make more money and that's why a lot of films convert into 3D when it's not needed but in this film with the special effects it fitted in very well and was very good. Even with my picking, the effects were still great and there was one questionable scene at the end where spider man's misplaced hand was firing "WEB" right at our faces - just plain dodgy.


I liked this film a lot, but there were some points that I didn't like at all. The first thing is ironic considering i'm only a "young en" myself but I found it quite childish . I'm not on about the corny scenes where the public help spider man as I thought they suited the film and I know the target audience is children (and there money bringing parents) but in all of the fights scenes there was this childish pathetic music playing and for me it just lost all intensity and considering that the recent marvel film, Avengers Assemble combined humor and action aimed for all ages, this seemed that it was aiming at one demographic. The main thing in the film that bothered me is that I think they had too many relationships with the main character that none of them were developed enough. As well as Peter dealing with love interest Gwen and friend then for Dr. Connors the film also dealt with relationships with Uncle Ben, Aunt May, Gwen's dad Captain Stacy and school bully Flash. While they will be planning to develop a lot of them, well too late for some of them. I think that the main one they should have included is more with Peter and Dr.Connors as they met a few times and then that was it. Since they had Dr.Connors as Peter's farther's friend who he tracks down they should have played more on that and connecting as when they faced it didn't feel that the characters didn't have enough relationship to create the emotion it needed. And that was the same for Captain Stacy and Uncle Ben and seeing as they are now: SPOILER ALERT; dead it seemed that they tried to shuffle so many relationships around they didn't add depth to the ones that needed it more.


Having said that this film is very entertaining if not alone for the special effects for the outstanding performance of Andrew Garfield who looks to have a very bright and promising career. If your reading this and have kids then take them to see this film as they will love it and love you for ever. And if your reading this and you are a kid, then go see it NOW!!!


The Good: ANDREW GARFIELD 
The Bad: Camp Lizard
The Ugly: A VERY RUDE LAST IMAGE OF SPIDER MAN SHOOTING "WEB" AT THE AUDIENCE

Rating: 4*

Chernobyl Diaries

Directed by: Bradley Parker


Starring: Jesse McCartney, Jonathan Sadowski, Olivia Dudley (SO NOBODY!!!!)


Plot: Six tourists (4 American - SHOCK) hire a sketchy tour guide (SHOCK) who takes them to the abandoned city Pripyat, the former home to the workers of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor (ORIGINAL). During their exploration, they soon discover they are not alone (SHOCKER). 


WARNING: IF YOU LIKED THIS FILM THEN DO NOT READ THIS AS THE FOLLOWING SLAGS THIS FILM OFF COMPLETELY!!!!


This film bought me to the cinema on the originality on where it was set and surrounding the Chernobyl disaster. I was interested in that a film to my knowledge has never been based there before and the whole idea of it seemed like the perfect location for an eerie horror film. It was very disappointing. It was full of predictable scenes, awful acting and no actual scares. It ruined the interest I had for it and I just thought that there was so much potential with the Chernobyl disaster but let it down completely. Hopefully one day the idea of it will be revisited with an original story line, good actors and a film that actually maintains interest. 


I am sorry that this review is very short but there is not much to write about. I would not advise to pay to watch this film but if you choose to illegally download it then it's up to you (Still debatable if it is worth it or not) . I would advise to anyone who is interested in making a film based on the Chernobyl disaster to watch this film only so they know what not to do.



The Good: Location of the film
The Bad: How predictable it is
The Ugly: Everything

Rating: 0.5*

Red Lights

Directed by: Rodrigo Cortes


Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Robert De Niro, Cillian Murphy


Plot: A psychologist (Sigourney) and her colleague (Cillian) investigate paranormal/ psychic occurances but when world famous and self-proclaimed psychic (De Niro) returns from retirements, events start to unfold that could lead them questioning everything they know.


I was interested by the concept of this film of disproving paranormal powers but at the same time it left the question in your head, Is it real? The film also had the themes of self belief which was made clear at the end and was not subtle about what they wanted to show. However, it was ironic how a film about physics had a "twist" that I guessed in the first five minutes of the film. I felt that it was boring at times with long periods of times where nothing was happening. Although I thought Cillian's performance was the best thing in it (which wasn't hard) there was no chemistry between the characters and the whole film seemed that it lacked emotion until the final sequence. When they tried to included an emotional depth to it by involving the concuss son of Margaret Matheson (Sigourney) it just felt flaccid and then it didn't reflect or resolve any development in the film.


I promised myself I wouldn't be too critical with any film but oh well. Overall, parts were entertaining especially when they involved disproving physics and revealing some tricks of the trade - although they may not be true it seemed interesting. However, the performances were not good expect for De Niro who wasn't just bad, but awful in one of the least convincing performances he has done. The concept still interests me but I wished they developed the characters more and worked on an ending that wasn't predictable or made sense as to me the ending although reflected the themes of self belief, didn't follow the rest of the film.


The Good: Concept
The Bad: Didn't hold interest
The Ugly: De Niro

Rating: 1.5*

About the Blog:

This blog is simply about my love for films where I will be discussing my opinions and views on all the films I watch at the cinema (which will be a lot) and as well will be posting special articles about my favorite films, actors, actresses and more. Hope you all enjoy them and I'm always open for feedback.