Going Around In Loops

A bit slow on this one, and for that I can only apologise. A film hailed as a modern masterpiece with five star reviews from almost everyone, but is it all it is cracked up to be? A film that, from the simplest description, sounds like the coolest thing around. Just look at the key aspects: time travel, assassins, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, telekinesis. Everything seems to scream 'cool.' But it is? this is Looper.

In the year 2074, it is extremely difficult to dispose of a body. Because of this, criminal organisations use an advantage they have in the future, time travel, to zap anyone they need to get rid of back 30 years to be killed by a special type of assassin known as a Looper. One of these Loopers is a man called Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), the youngest Looper that the Boss, Abe (Jeff Daniels), ever hired. But every loop has to be closed. This means that eventually,  a Looper has to assassinate the future version of themselves. When this happens to Joe, he hesitates, leaving his future self to run. Old Joe (Bruce Willis), fixated on the idea of changing his own past and future ('Oh no I've gone cross-eyed') tries to find the man known in future as the 'Rainmaker'; a man who closes loops for no reasons. A man who is only a child in 2044. Trying to fix his error by terminating his future self, Young Joe stumbles across Sara (Emily Blunt) and her son Cid (Pierce Gagnon) who he bonds with but nothing is safe.

Now Joe, what would Freud say?

If Joseph Gordon-Levitt's name hadn't been splashed all over the posters and promos for this film, it would be hard to tell that it was him. With plenty of face make up (we'll get back to that) he was not playing his own character. He had a far more difficult challenge: to play Bruce Willis' character but young. The good news is he does this perfectly. For the most part of the film, it is like watching a young Bruce Willis as Gordon-Levitt completely nails Willis' facial expressions and way of talking, which is not an easy task. Emily Blunt was excellent as Sara, the most touching character in the film and the character who really provided the film with heart. Her performance showed the deep pain that an under-appreciated mother feels as well as the outer strength a single mother has to portray, even when scared or weak. Incredible child acting from Pierce Gognon as Cid, a clearly troubled child but a very smart one. And, of course, Bruce Willis is constantly awesome. He's really understanding that he is not the young action star that he once was but he knows that doesn't mean he is no longer a badass. His roles and the way he performs them are more reflective of his age and because of this, they're a lot better than his other recent films (See Surrogates.)

In the future, most people have the force too.

The make up artist on this film deserves a medal. That's the first technical aspect that needs to be mentioned. Alongside Gordon-Levitt's brilliant acting is the make up that made him look ridiculously like a young Bruce Willis. For that, we should all applaud. Next, the cinematography was subtly outstanding. It captured the world of the future without needing to explicitly point it out at any point. Sure there was no incredible and revolutionary camera work (see The Tree of Life) but it is that implicitness that made the futuristic world more absorbing. What helped with this was the fresh and original writing. While time assassins are nothing new, the idea of the actual assassin not being the time traveller is a whole new perspective on the concept. Admittedly, there are paradoxes galore - focus on them too much and you'll get a good ol' headache - but overall, the writing was incredible. Rian Johnson, who also directed, has done a smashing job.

A fresh and original film, something that we long for in this world of remakes and adaptations. A must see. the sort of film that could become you're new favourite. Unlike a lot of modern science fiction, Looper strives to appeal to action fans, sci-fi fans, and essentially everyone. A really well written, developed, and produced film. And hey, it has funny bits too!

Best Bit? The ending was simply incredible. The last half an hour was moved the movie from extremely good to a modern marvel. Simply fantastic.

Bond

 When we hear the word 'franchise', we often shiver as we think back to the 'Nightmare on Elm Street' series, or 'Saw', or 'Friday the 13th', or 'The Grudge', or any horror movie series - yes, that includes 'High School Musical'. But we often neglect a series that have been going for longer than most of my readers have been alive. I'm sure you're aware where I'm going with this, but if you're not, nine people have played the title character over 23 (official) films and he takes his Martini shaken, not stirred. Yes, it's James Bond and his new adventure, Skyfall.

The film opens with one of MI6's top secret agents, 007, or James Bond (Daniel Craig) , trying to chase down a possible terrorist (Ola Rapace) who has managed to get his hands on a hard drive that contains the names of undercover field operatives and the gangs they are in, information that could make MI6 simply crumble. Fighting on top of a train, Bond struggles to get the hard drive and his partner, Eve (Naomie Harris), lines up a shot - not a clean shot - at the suspect. M (Judie Dench) insists that she takes the shot and Bond goes down. The suspect escapes. Cue opening titles. M's authority is in question by Gareth Mallory (Ralph Fiennes), Bond is alive but hidden away, and computer genius, Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem), is causing some major issues for MI6. Fearing the country he loves is in danger, Bond returns to England and begins to follow the only trail they have to find Silva - the bullet in his shoulder. With a new, young Q (Ben Whishaw) to help him out, 007 will do whatever it will take to protect his Queen, Country, and, most importantly, M, providing he can stay a step ahead of his enemies at all times.

Bond really had to train for this mission

At 43 years old at the time of filming, one may think that Daniel Craig is getting a bit old for Bond (especially with another two films on his contract), well you would be wrong. Craig still performs with all the style and swag that Bond should have. Yet, when he has a busted shoulder from a bullet, we see that pain when he does anything physical - something commonly overlooked in action films; bullets actually hurt for more than five minutes. His age ties perfectly into his performance with lots of references back to the good old days of exploding pens and ejector seats but, as Mallory states, few 00 agents get out cleanly, they go until they die. You don't get too old to be an agent, you die younger. There's a real sentimentality in both Dench and Craig as the plot develops a true heart - again, something often missed by action flicks - and a new, more fresh connection with these characters is created. They are no longer agents who simply do their job (and engage in the occasional bedroom activity), but they have a past, a set of emotions, and a heart.  Javier Bardem, who we all know can be a fantastic villain (see No Country For Old Men), once again holds up his reputation of being simply amazing. Switching between dark and vicious to manically laughing at his own little plans, he captures everything that Silva should be: mentally unstable, dedicated, determined, a genius, hurt, and broken. One of the best Bond villains in a long time. Smart, crazed, and vengeful... What more could you want? Also, a special mention to Ben Whishaw, who was a brilliant new Q and worked incredibly with Craig's Bond. Not only a genius, but also a very witty character and one that, no doubt, everyone will want to see again.

This film hard some real 'art

The thing that really stood out for this film, like most Bonds, was the exceedingly well coordinated and choreographed action and fighting. From the very beginning, the action was full of suspense and was completely breathtaking. There was no way anyone in the audience could draw their eyes from the screen during a fight or a chase because it was simply too engaging. It also didn't stray too much towards camp action which a lot of the older Bonds do contain (inflating henchmen, giant lasers). While it wasn't camp, it was very funny. Definitely the wittiest of the Daniel Craig Bond films. The fun lines didn't seem out of place at all or forced in anyway, it was completely organic. Sam Mendes really knew what he was doing when he put the film together. A complex plot that didn't get confusing which is where Quantum of Solace failed.

Back to the standard of Casino Royale, if not surpassing it, and a really enjoyable watch. A definite must see. Bond is, quite simply, back. And he will return.

Best Bit? Just watching Silva's plan unfold was so interesting and fascinating. Really good writing.

Time To Rent A Movie... But Which One?

The other day, I was chatting to a fresher (A delightful girl by the name of Sian - She'll appreciate the name dropping) and we discovered we shared a mutual love for the musical Rent. To my horror, I discovered she had not seen the stage production, only the movie. Luckily for her, I have the 2008 Broadway Filming on my laptop. Cue a movie night at the end of which Sian said the words, 'I prefer the film.' A discussion broke out and the suggestion was made that I review them both, so here we go.

If, somehow, you are not aware of Rent or what it is about, here is a quick synopsis: a group of seven friends living in poverty in New York are struggling with love, failing careers, and AIDS. They face eviction from their homes due to their old friend Benny having married into a fair amount of money and buying the block that the protagonists live in. A musical that copes with sickness, friendship, and love in a touching manner. The film cuts several songs out but has the advantage of a real landscape for the characters to perform around. The 2008 Broadway movie obviously has more songs (in fact is mostly sung) and an (almost) entirely different cast. A near bare stage and less extras. How do they compare to one another? Let's see.

Rent: The Film

Cast:
Anthony Rapp - Mark Cohen
Adam Pascal - Roger Davis
Rosario Dawson - Mimi Marquez
Jesse L. Martin - Thomas B. "Tom" Collins
Wilson Jermaine Heredia - Angel Dumott Schunard
Idina Menzel - Maureen Johnson
Tracie Thoms - Joanne Jefferson
Taye Diggs - Benjamin "Benny" Coffin III

A truly fantastic cast. Most of the cast that had been performing together from the show's first performance on Broadway. The two newcomers, Thoms and Dawson, are both incredible additions to the cast and it is impossible to tell that they hadn't previously been in the cast. They provide two of the most dedicated performances in the film and Dawson's voice is simply indescribably perfect for Mimi's character. Daphne Rubin-Vega and Fredi Walker (the original Mimi and Joanne, respectively) both left the cast because they felt they were too old for their characters - which perhaps a few more cast members should have considered... Rubin- Vega was also pregnant - and their replacements fitted their roles perfectly. In fact, the only issue with the cast is Pascal's portrayal of Roger. There is little emotional change in his character at all. Admittedly, the songs that show this most are rushed or cut out (Without You, Goodbye Love) but for a man who hasn't left his apartment for seven months, there never seems to be that deep hurt that Roger is meant to have. The hidden pain is not there.

The real issues with the film come from the script. Having kept most of the dialogue from the stage production, one would think that the film would flow like it does on stage. It does not. Considering most of the lines in the stage production are sung, when spoken in the film they sound jarring and peculiar. the rhyming pattern in the speech sound like a Dr Seuss book when simply spoken.The second huge issue with the writing is so much of importance is cut out or rushed. Obviously, the stage production comes in at around two and a half hours and therefore needs a lot of cutting. We don't find out that Roger's ex slit her wrists and telling him he had AIDs in the note. We miss Mark's entire issue about being the only one to survive out of his closest friends. The film still works without these aspects, but it does lose a lot in terms of emotion. Christopher Columbus actually cut most of Goodbye Love and Halloween (two of Mark's most important songs) because he was fearful of the emotional overload, which is what, ironically, the film suffered without.

While it may be pretty to look at and listen to during the songs, the film lacks a strong core. As with many on-screen musicals, it suffers from a pile of cheese during musical numbers that make it all a bit soft. Walking through deserts, singing off rooftops, throwing flaming paper into the road because your home is cold (that one really makes no sense), an engagement party that goes wrong, complete with on-the-table dancing. Get the soundtrack for the film; that's all you really need.

Best Bit?  Rosario Dawson's voice is incredible and her song, Out Tonight, is absolutely incredible. Without You, despite being rushed, is still the most touching moment of the film, followed closely by I'll Cover You (Reprise).

Rent: Filmed Live On Broadway

Cast:
Will Chase - Roger Davis
Adam Kantor - Mark Cohen
Michael McElroy - Thomas B. "Tom" Collins
Rodney Hicks - Benjamin "Benny" Coffin III
Tracie Thoms - Joanne Jefferson
Justin Johnston - Angel Dumott-Schunard
Renée Elise Goldsberry - Mimi Marquez
Eden Espinosa - Maureen Johnson

There is few things in films that I can call flawless, but this cast is exactly that. Every single cast member on stage has an incredible voice and also gives the performance of their lives. The chemistry in all of the relationships is so strong you wouldn't believe there was any acting involved. Of course, Thoms is still playing Joanne, but the rest of the cast (except Hicks, who was a Benny understudy, and Gwen Stewart (Bag Lady)) are new and extremely different to the film cast. No particular performance can be picke out as the best. Though, McElroy's rendition of I'll Cover You (Reprise) will cause even the hardest of hearts to melt and the driest of eyes to water. It is simply beautiful and touching.

Despite having little more than a few tables, some stairs, and a little trap door, the scenery surrounding the action is completely there. At no point will you find yourself questioning what is going on. Something about the intimacy on stage - the reality of it all - makes even the minimalistic set seem defined and identifiable. The singing is outstanding and as almost the entire production is sung, the texture and layers of all the songs adds something that no score could ever do. Even songs like Christmas Bells which deals with, in a single song, love, drug addictions, friendship, the homeless, and snow, to name but a few things. Filmed like a movie, only the occasional shot shows the entire stage, but it means that those who were never fortunate enough to visit Broadway (like yours truly) can get an intimate viewing of the show and get the idea of what it would have been like both in the audience and on stage. 

Unavailable as a soundtrack, but if it were, it would still not be enough. While the singing is fantastic, it is by no means the only strong point of the show. The acting is incredible, the direction is incredible, the singing is beyond words. A fantastic watch, especially for those who love seeing productions on the stage. Simply a must-see for musical fans.

Best Bit? La Vie Boheme is a definite highlight of the production and the chills that will be sent down your spine during I'll Cover You (Reprise) are unbelievable. If you don't cry, you're evidently soulless. 

How They Compare

The immediate thing that must be discussed when comparing these two films is the scenery. One has real scenery, one is minimalistic. How could the latter ever live up to that? The film does have this as an easy advantage; it is a lot easier to see where the characters are and what they are doing without Mark's occasional narration that the production has. However, on stage, four different scenarios can be playing out at the same time. Examples of this include Rent and Christmas Bells, the former of which is also in the film but only has two stories running during the song - Mark and Roger having to pay rent and Collins getting attacked - whereas the stage production also introduces us to Joanne and her relationship with Maureen and a more human side to Benny, something the film does not do at all. This adds more depth to the stage production and, honestly, it looks and sounds better than the film as well.

Acting is hard to compare as the new cast act very differently to the old cast - with the exception of Thoms. Rosario Dawson is a better singer than Renée Elise Goldsberry however Goldsberry has a better connection with her fellow cast, which makes her a lot easier to watch. her connection with Will Chase as Roger in particular is something that is rare to see in even the bes actors. Chase, in general, seems to capture more of Roger's past in his performance. There are clearer signs of the pain he has experienced; something that just doesn't come across in Pascal's performance. Apart from this, both casts are pretty equal. We see Justin Johnston's impressive vocal range than we do of Wilson Jermaine Heredia's, though this is probably because Contact and Happy New Year B are not in the film, Angel's best songs to show of his vocal range. Also, Eden Espinosa is creepily similar to Idina Menzel, buut not quite as good in any way.

The complexity of the music on stage really outdoes that in the film in every sense and it doesn't require completely ridiculous set pieces. I will never be entirely sure what Christopher Columbus was aiming to do in the following scenes: Everyone throwing fire out of their windows during Rent, Roger singing off his balcony whilst everyone sings up at him from the street with no purpose for being there in Another Day, Mark hitting his head and imagining a large Tango session with Joanne in Tango: Maureen, the piles of TVs that Maureen uses during Over the Moon despite being so poor, Roger walking through the desert in What You Own, Mark and Roger singing off their roof in What You Own - Mark in fact tells the sky, 'Alexi? I need to finish my own film, I quit!' I don't think that's an official resignation Mark. There are also fantastic set pieces in the film; both Sante Fe and Today 4 U are better in the film than on stage. However, the entire Joanne/Maureen engagement is a completely unneeded extra plot which could have easily been replaced with better songs and scenes.

My final point is that the film tries a little too hard to be big and grand. The set pieces already mention which don't work as well as Columbus hoped they would are examples of this, but also moments like the entire cast singing the end of Rent which completely removes the intensity of Mark and Roger's problems and also cuts out their incredible final harmony. (Seriously, as a singer, those notes are hard to hit.)

If you want to watch Rent then, watch the 2008 Broadway filming. It's as simple as that. I would suggest watching both to make a fair decision on them for yourself, but, as I mentioned previously, the soundtrack from the film is really the best thing about it, so owning that should suffice.

Rent: The Film

Rent: Filmed Live On Broadway

Russians Like Their Tattoos.

There are a lot of Mafia and mob related movies out there in the world. Gangs films can become cult favourites, like The Warriors, and gangster movies can be regarded as the best films in creation, like The Godfather and The Departed. You would think there would be nothing more that can be done with gangs and the Mafia and you'd be wrong. Every year a couple are released and in 2007 the film we look at today was released. It's called Eastern Promises.

When an unidentified young women dies while giving birth to a baby girl in Anna's (Naomi Watts) ward, Anna takes it upon herself to translate the late mother’s Russian diary to find the correct home for the new born, Christine. After little help from her mother, Helen (Sinéad Cusack), and uncle, Stepan (Jerzy Skolimowski), she stumbles upon a restaurant run by Russians, in which the owner, Semyon (Armin Mueller-Stahl), offers to translate the diary faster than her uncle. What Anna doesn't realise is she’s just handed the diary over to a Russian mob known as Vory v Zakone. Semyon is the head but he has to keep looking out for his son Kirill (Vincent Cassel) and often sends his driver Nikolai (Viggo Mortensen) to keep an eye on him. Desperate for answers, Anna tries to appeal to Nikolai’s good side and plead him for help. Unfortunately, due to Kirill rash decisions of revenge, the mob have plenty of issues on their hands, including staying alive.

The Mafia's rendition of Sweeney Todd was a huge hit.

There is fantastic acting throughout the movie. Viggo Mortensen is completely intimidating with his cold character that clearly has a caring and soft side. There is something utterly terrifying about the way he performs and then, as a nice juxtaposition, he suddenly shows he cares for his Russian brothers and even, to some extent, Anna and the baby. In contrast, Vincent Cassel, who is also fantastic, has a lack of care for anyone and everything as Kirill. There is something about Cassel's performance that shows deep hurt and repressed emotions – he is possibly/ quite probably a closeted homosexual – and it really shows throughout the film, peaking towards the end. However, his accent did slip from thick Russian – like the other mob members – to slightly French. Oops. Naomi Watts is also brilliant. Caring and compassionate, but strong willed and does not plan on giving up. A really interesting performance because her relationships with the mob members, particularly Nikolai, are completely engaging despite being completely different characters. The supporting cast are superb. A special mention to Jerzy Skolimowski  for his performance as Stepan; he’s a simple character that makes a big impact on the film.

The least incognito thing about Nikolai's appearance was a simple fact...
Sunglasses in England? As if.

An excellently written script that has some of the most engaging dialogue of the modern film age. The seamless transition between speaking English and speaking Russian adds a layer of simple complexity* and brings a sense of diversity and realism to the film. A lot of films choose the easy option of using one fluent language, but David Cronenberg refused to take the lazy route. A very good choice. The technical elements of the film lacked somewhat. A film of this style and standard needed a little more in terms of score and cinematography. There was a brilliantly choreographed fight scene with a handful of complete male nudity but nothing of real decency was added in in the post-production room. It really needed, in particular, more experimentation in the camera work department. That is what would have made this film a masterpiece in modern gangster movies. 

Overall, a wonderful achievement in Mafia movies as well as British movies. Don't be afraid of the common use of subtitles, this movie is worth reading a little bit. It has something for everyone. After watching, you'll dream of being as cool as Mortensen as Nikolai. (It is heartbreaking when you realise you can't be.)

Best Bit? There's a fantastic scene with Kirill and Nikolai with several hookers and Kirill turns nasty. It shows the loyalty of Nikolai and the brutality of Kirill.

Guns Are Bad

A lot of movies are released every year and it is impossible to get round to watching all of them. This means that it takes me a few years to even hear about movies that I should watch. Today's review is an e/xample of such a movie. Released in 2007, Channel 4 and my housemate are to thank (or are they) for me watching today's film. This is The Brave One.

David (Naveen Andrews) and Erica (Jodie Foster) are a happy couple and are planning for their weding. In their happy married life, they go for walks with their dog and flirt over the colour of their wediing invitations. However, one night time stroll, their dog runs off down a tunnel and into the hands of some thugs. The thugs, when they don't get what they want, brutally attack Erica and David, leaving them both in critical condition. While Erica survives, David does not. Erica has to adjust and, having trouble leaving her apartment, decides to buy a gun for protection in the city of New York, the city she once loved. But guns are dangerous things and from the second she gets it, in less than legal circumstances, it starts causing problems. Serious problems.

After not eating much in hospital, all Erica wanted was a subway.

 

The acting in the film is fantastic. By far the best aspect of the movie. The characters have such connections that feel genuine and heartfelt. Jodie Foster's Erica was a brilliant representation of someone who had experienced real pain and suffering, someone who is crippled by fear and confusion. Her on screen relationship with Naveen Andrews' David is completely believable and touching. That love for David is visible throughout her entire performance. Terrence Howard's Detective Mercer, while lacking conviction in his emotions, is a great character. He is great fun to watch and ocassionally, there is a glimpse of brilliance in his acting. Again, he connects excellently with Jodie Foster on screen and together they make a completely engaging movie.

Simply wanted to point out how dashing Terrence Howard is in a suit.

The biggest downfall with the film is the music. Often it completely detracts from the action on screen rather than drawing attention to it. It is not just a question of misplaced music, but also of a bad choice of music. Sometimes it sounds like the score from a large scale blockbuster has been placed over the film rather than create a more accurate atmosphere. On top of this, the cinematographer gets a little carried away with his spinning camera. Far too often, one has to tilt their head almost ninety degrees in order to watch the film. And admitedly, the script has enough holes in to have a round of golf. The overall plot is fine and dandy, it is just in the details. Buying a gun from a dodgy man in a backstreet of New York after not leaving your apartment for fear of the people outside, is but one example of these aggrivating holes.

An engaging film. The acting and overall direction make up for the technical faults and it is still a completely watchable film. The 122 minutes do not drag on and that's always the key for a two hour movie. A good time killer but no masterpiece.

Best Bit? My personal favourite scene was Erica's interview with Mercer. Some of the best acting in the film.

Awkward Teenagers All Grown Up

It has been several years since we last saw this group of young people on screen together, and despite countless straight-to-DVD sequels, everyone sort of wished for them back. Well good news, but the big difference being that they are all grown up and mature (well, mostly) and not still crouched on the kitchen table with a pie in their hands. That is right. It is American Reunion. (Or American Pie: Reunion in the UK)

Jim (Jason Biggs) and Michelle Alyson Hannigan) are now married (obviously, considering the 2003 film, American Pie: The Wedding) and have a two year old son Evan but their marriage has hit an issue: they never have sex. However, they have a solution. In the upcoming weeks, their high school is holding a Class of ’99 reunion. The plan is to meet up with the other guys – Kevin (Thomas Ian Nicholas), Finch (Eddie Kaye Thomas), and Oz (Chris Klein) – a couple of days prior to the reunion, party a little, and then spend some quality alone time, just Jim and Michelle. But of course, one small obstacle can cause the entire plan to fall down; in this case, that obstacle is called Stifler (Seann William Scott). Upon discovering the other guys at a bar, he vows to make the weekend reflect those of the old days, much to Jim’s disagreement. The weekend then becomes an adventure of sorts with everyone trying to balance their old lives with their new ones. As old loves return, new ones are threatened and dilemmas begin to develop. Along the way they discover a girl, Kara (Ali Cobrin), who Jim used to babysit, some jet skis, and a tape of Oz’s time on ‘Celebrity Dance Off’.

The new season of 'Queer Eye For The Straight Guy' was no where near as tricky

The issue with bringing back an old franchise is making the new film appeal to the old fans as well as a whole new generation. American Reunion had the immediate advantage of casting all the same old actors which saves writing people out or new characters in. And the really excellent news is that all of the actors have remembered and can still portray their characters accurately a long with the added challenge of making them mature. Jason Biggs, in particular, really matured his character but, at the same time, everything was exactly the same. Jim is still the awkward lovable Jewish lad that he always has been but he's just more responsible now and his situations come from trying to do the right thing, rather than recklessness or foolishness. Eddie Kaye Thomas was also fantastic as Finch, (he was always my personal favourite character) and his story line was brilliantly acted and still hilarious. I'm also sure it goes without saying that Seann William Scott was brilliant as Stifler, the link to the past and immaturity; the one who throws everyone in at the deep end and then laughs as they struggle with their situations. Minor criticism of Thomas Ian Nicholas and Chris Klein who were both a bit dull. I did not help that they had story lines that lacked comedy but there was still something missing from both of them, particularly Klein, who just seemed despondent at points.

Some parts of the film did sock.

While distinctly lacking in as many laugh out loud moments compared to the earlier cinematic releases, American Reunion is fantastic at providing the one aspect that really is important to the franchise: awkwardness. The sex obsessed teenagers of the older movies would never have been funny if the situations played out even remotely well or overtly terrible. What has always worked with American Pie films, is finding that equilibrium where nothing goes right but somehow all is not lost. That awkward middle ground that will make any audience cringe. American Reunion was no exception and that is probably its biggest success. Its biggest flaw, however, is the effort to put in meaning or an extra story line. It should always be a dumb comedy, that's what it is good at, but sometimes characters are given too many emotive scenarios which are never fully developed and the screen time would have been better used making more jokes.

Fans of the older movies will like it just as much as the new audience members. The jokes relating back to the earlier films will provide joy to many an American Pie fan but, admittedly, the film isn't as fresh it used to be, but it would be a lovely conclusion to the franchise. (Though the film cleverly leaves it open for sequels if needed.) A good watch, but definitely a watch-with-friends type movie. Plenty of laughs, lots of cringing, and a only a few almost comic moments.

 

Best Bit? I cracked up more when Stifler met someone's mum than anything else. A clever clever joke, and very funny.

The Wee Bonnie Princess

PIXAR are an animation company. They make, what a lot of people would call, kids movies. They are the masterminds behind the Toy Story series, Up, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc , and a host of other well known and loved movies. They have covered a lot of genres and touched a lot of hearts. They focus more on their stories than any other film production company. And now they are providing their interpretation of fairy tales and, more importantly, adding another movie to Disney's stream of princess films. This is Brave.

Merida (Kelly Macdonald) is a Scottish princess and daughter to King Fergus (Billy Connolly) and Queen Elinor (Emma Thompson). They live in a castle in Scotland in the Medieval times with Merida's three younger brothers who are triplets. What her parents haven't told her, however, is that the three neighbouring clan leaders are going to present their first born sons to compete for Merida's hand in marriage, an idea which she strongly opposes. Her mother convinces her that it is her fate and her destiny to marry one of these men. Merdia, in a fit of anger and despair runs off with her horse, Angus, and heads into the woods. A trail of blue willo-the-wisps (glowing balls of blue lights that lead one to their destiny) appear and take Merida to a small cottage where an old lady (Julie Walters), a wood cutter, promises she can assist with changing the princess' fate. But there is a dark side to this promise and things get out of hands for Merida very quickly. She'll have to remain brave to get through the obstacles that now present themselves.

The triplets will shoot into your heart

It is needless to say that this is the finest animation that cinema has ever experienced to date. The attention to detail is something that only PIXAR could ever be capable of achieving. Every single one or Merida's ginger curls has a life of it's own, every single leaf dances individually, and the landscapes are so beautifully modelled, it is almost impossible to tell that it is animation. The soundtrack is also a delightful accompaniment to the film, creating a superb atmosphere that perfectly reflects that action on screen. If you didn't like Celtic or Scottish Folk music before, you will now. It has something for everyone. There is enough jokes so that everyone will laugh despite age difference. A cheeky bum slap for the adults, the triplets antics for the young ones. Oh, it is also possible that it will make you cry. It is PIXAR. What did you expect? They are brutal story tellers.

A film about hot ginger with curly hair and a ripped dress...
Who is also a badass.

In true Pixar fashion, the story's subject matter is based on a contemporary issue, shifted into a fantasy world. Here, the issue of families and the struggle that they present but ultimately how important it is. The characters are so easy to relate to and so realistically written that you will easily notice the comparisons to people you know in your life. However, what makes Brave stand out among the other Disney Princess movies is it's focus, not on love, but on independence. Mulan ignited the idea of a strong Disney princess - fighting for her families pride in a man's world - even if she did fall in love along the way with a strong man. Feminists can rejoice as Merida promotes female strength, independence, and beauty. She shows that you do not have to be a masculine looking lady to be strong, you can also be a hot ginger. She's not doing anything for love, in fact he wants to avoid marriage. Sure, she accepts love and that she may fall in love, but that is simply a beautifully animated hair on the head of this film.

Whether you're simple captivated by the outstanding animation, or deeply love a magical story, you will enjoy Brave. The story does find simple ways to avoid complicated issues and characters come to ridiculous conclusions far too quickly, but overall, the brilliance out weighs it's flaws. It may not go down in PIXAR's history as one of their best films, but it is definitely near the top of the list of Disney Princess films. Don't be fooled into thinking this is a kid's movie. It is made for all ages and it is completely lovable. It is funny, touching, and has some brilliantly entertaining fight scenes. A must see.

Best Bit? Anything involving the little brothers. The cinema would burst into laughter with almost all their antics.

La Luna 

The latest PIXAR short is possible the prettiest to date. A pair of men argue while rowing out to sea, a boy sat between them. They anchor and then the moon rises. And in that moment, the cinema's air quantity dropped a large amount as every single person seated gasped. The animation was incredible, the story was simple and poetic. Not a single word was said in the entirety of the short but everything was understood. Simply brilliant film making.