If you know the original Underworld you’ve a pretty good idea what you’re getting here: Vampires, Werewolves, action, a palette of blacks & blue, a certain amount of gore, a British character actor of a certain age, a gut shaking thump to the soundtrack and, of course, Kate Beckinsale in that outfit.

Yet for each of those characteristics they have in common each of the Underworld films is a slightly different beast.  The first is more political, Evolution is more of a chase and Rise of the Lycans is more historical.  So what of Awakening?  Humans have discovered the existence of Vampires and Lycans and set out to exterminate them.

After three films most people will already have some idea if this is a film for them or not.  The real question is does it deliver (and does it have Kate Beckinsale in that outfit)?  Personally I have to say it’s a definite yes.  It delivers.

I’m not going to over analyse it because, frankly, analysing this film too much would be silly.

I still think the first film is my favourite because the politics and mystery added a level of nuance to the story.  Underworld: Awakening is a new fairly close second place.

And it has Kate Beckinsale in that outfit.  With guns.

If you’ve ever stood on the side of a road and seen a car about to crash you’ll understand this film.  If you’ve ever sat in a car that is likely to crash you’ll understand what is staring the characters in the face in Margin Call.

Margin Call is the story of 48 hours in a bank as things go wrong.  Almost from the start there is a growing sense that things are falling apart.  It starts in a small way and grows as the crash looms more and more certain.  This is a story that could become bogged down in the detail of the financial dealings at the core of the story.  Instead it sketches them in the same way a science fiction film uses techno babble to explain how a space ship travels faster than light and don’t fall out of the sky despite having no wings.

There seems to have been a Mexican standoff amongst the actors.  There are lots of actors in this who are known for chewing scenery including Kevin Spacey, Paul Bettany, Jeremy Irons, Zachary Quinto and Stanley Tucci.  Yet the performances are measured without histrionics.  The drama is on the screen but it’s the car crash that’s about to happen.

This is a smart film with no gun fire, chases, explosions, fist fights or car crashes except a metaphorical one. If you want to see an interesting film go see this.

They say football is a game of two halves: and so is my review of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol.

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol is an enjoyable movie.  It’s populated by beautiful people in exotic locations.  It has guns and gadgets.  It has explosions.  It has chases.  It has spectacular high places.  It has all the elements of a modern action spy thriller.

It is dominated by Tom Cruise but I don’t see that as a bad thing.  It’s his name above the title on the poster.  He’s the one at the front of the group on the poster.  He’s one of the film’s producers too.   If he’d not been the main player reviewers would be asking “where’s Tom?”

It has a stand out performance for me was Simon Pegg: Benji  is a great foil to Ethan Hunt.  Benji is both competent at the technical parts of the job but Pegg manages to infuse him with enough comedy to  lighten the films atmosphere.  William Brandt  (Jeremy Renner) and Jane Carter (Paula Patton) round out the team yet despite being given more back story than Benji  get less to do.

It’s Not a lot of effort goes into developing the villains whose actions drive the plot with little more justification than they’re a bit mad or are working for cash.

It is overall an enjoyable action movie – not a classic but good fun.

But is it a Mission Impossible film?

On the surface it has the trappings of a film based on the 1960′s TV show: the famous theme music runs over credits that feature glimpses of the action to come while a fuse burns down; there are face masks; there are missions that are impossible; the stakes are high; the secretary will disavow all knowledge etc etc etc.

The problem is these are elements borrowed from the series not what made it unique.  Week in week out they used to select a team of talented individuals, have a little fun as they showed the gear they’d use, then the stone cold operatives would go into action, overcome some unexpected happenings before Mission: Accomplished they’d ride into the distance.  I’ve not kept count but if the current IMF pull off more than 50% of their jobs then I’d be surprised.  At least in Ghost Protocol despite hints there aren’t any traitors in the IMF.

Oddly one of the elements of the movie I liked the most annoys me as being not MI.  Benji is good as the tech guy but he isn’t a Barney.  Barney would crack a joke in prep for a mission but on the job?  Speaking English, talking about how cool it is to be a spy while walking through the Kremlin?  Mission Impossible isn’t about characters who need to wise crack all the time.  Leave the one liners to Bond movies.   I’d actually like to see if Simon Pegg can play a straight role because I have a feeling he’d be pretty good at it.

Jane Carter is another case of not quite getting the original series.  I’m glad she can hold her own in a fight like her three male companions.  We’ve come a long way from heroines who couldn’t do anything in a fight via Buffy and Alias.  Carter shows us that she can fight in Dubai.  Yet if I was picking an MI squad I’d take Barbara Bain’s Cinnamon Carter.  Why?  Because in Mumbai she’d have tricked the guy into giving up the code for the satellite and done it with a ton of style.

Frankly I’d like to see the MIF showing a bit more brain and a little less brawn.   Not so much running around.  Fewer guns.  Fewer car chases.   By now the IMF should be getting disavowed.  And handed their P45s too and looking for jobs as MFI.

On the plus side the theme sounds like it’s in the correct time signature.  The infiltration of the Kremlin is pretty good till it goes wrong.  There are some nice references to elements of the original series dropped in.  This is also a smaller, lighter weight IMF at least after Ghost Protocol is invoked who can’t call tech support or the marines.  And they don’t throw a traitor in the MIF into the story.

So if you’re a fan of the original Mission Impossible series and were hoping for more than a bit of surface ephemera on an OK action film you may be disappointed.

One critic I saw pretty much said it was more of the same as Sherlock Holmes from 2010 as though that was almost a bad thing.  I’d say it’s a very smart move.  Its equal parts modern panto, action film and Sherlock Holmes redefined.  On a grander scale than Sherlock Holmes but without going to far over the top.

Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law keep the repartee going and both carry the action brilliantly too.  It appears such an effortless relationship that it gives space for the Moriarty / Holmes dynamic that drives the film’s plot.

Moriarty is delicious – a truly worthy performance to complement Robert Downey Jr as a villain to equal Holmes.  He’s not at all a moustache twirler but a subtle and balanced villain.  Stephen Fry’s Mycroft Holmes is used sparingly but brilliantly especially his nude scene.   He could probably carry a Quite Interesting film all of his own.

Rachel McAdams, Noomi Rapace, Paul Anderson, Kelly Reilly, Geraldine James, Eddie Marsan and every other character down to extras playing minor villains, street life and gypsies do a great job of supporting the core cast while in many cases bringing characters only briefly on-screen to life as more than punch bags for the leads.

The sound track is excellent and uses a fiddle to add pace.  There is just enough steam punk without going too far over the top.  The visuals are excellent and the use of camera focus on expansive visual effects shots of historic cities to draw the eye is beautifully used.  The slow motion style from the first film is reused to great effect in the action sequences.

Foreshadows wonderfully used.  Too often films foreshadow one thing with a lingering shot. This one plays with it wonderfully by layering foreshadowing with the obvious foreshadowing of some elements to distract from other foreshadowing more subtly set up for later.

The climatic chess game is a cliché setting up to a twist on Holmes working out a fight before it happens.

Twice they don’t show us the body.  The first time we hear her fall and Moriarty tells us Irene Adler is dead but all we see is a slightly bloody handkerchief.  When Holmes sniffs it could he have detected something that will be revealed in a sequel?   And of course there is the other  body we don’t see.

The only bad thing I could say about Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is that the title is a bit of a cliché.  I mean A Game of Shadows?  Try harder.  Sorry just kidding

So overall I really enjoyed this in fact I can’t think of anything bad to say about Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows.  Great fun.

Just back from seeing the prequel come remake of The Thing.  Not a bad film with some pretty landscape shots.  Unfortunately far too keen to show off the alien, the alien human hybrids and the space ship.  Also suffered from too many clichés.   Most of the “shocks” were very effectively spoilt by an overly obvious pre-shock – man in nervous situation, someone shouts boo at him then after a slow count to five the alien bursts out of its icy home.  Similarly lazy dialogue.  A shame because the potential for horror by building paranoia in a small group cut off from outside help lurks through the film.

Can someone explain why a geological expedition to Antarctica in 1982 has two flamethrowers, a box of grenades and at least one assault rifle?  Were they afraid some polar bears might migrate from the Artic?

Also suffered from the makers having watched Alien one too many time and wanting their very own Ripley to play with in a sequel to their prequel they left open in the first of their two endings.  The second ending cut into the credits pretty much sets up the original film.

The Thing is not a bad film overall but not one I’ll be planning to see again.

Johnny English Reborn is mildly amusing throughout occasionally managing to actually be funny.  More polished than the first Johnny English film and with far less reliance, thankfully, on toilet humour.

The supporting cast do a good job of being the straight guy to Rowan Atkinson’s English.  Only the characters played by Tim McInnerny, Daniel Kaluuya’s and a few extras don’t always play their parts straight.

There are some ok pastiches of Bond in the score, title sequence, plot, Q branch sequence and look.  There is a training sequence sends up You Only Live Twice’s ninja school with its ninja’s who are immune to a kick to the privates and every other training sequence made up of randomly cut together exercises showing a character going from wimp to hero.

The biggest problem is the inconsistency in Johnny English.  One minute Johnny is a highly competent spy and then suddenly he is an incompetent klutz.  Inspector Clouseau worked because he was always incompetent and accident prone but somehow that ended up played in his favour.  Blackadder worked because he was competent and sharp but surrounded by incompetents.  Johnny English sadly doesn’t achieve

It’s a shame because both flavours of English have their moments.  Incompetent English, the English of the adverts, who flies a helicopter along a road at street level is fun.  The competent English who outsmarts the free running villain is also fun.

So, sadly, Johnny English Reborn is more Johnny English Run Aground.

Hence the lack of a spoiler warning as there isn’t anything really worth mentioning that you’ll not get from the poster.

The period detail is alright.  The plot is solid (none of the issues I had with Blitz and its bizarre mix of British Realism and modern genius on the loose serial killer).  The action is competent.  The acting does the job but didn’t excite and neither Clive Owen or Robert De Niro really raise Jason Statham’s acting out of the usual run of the mill delivery.

Yet somehow the key element, whatever the spice that makes a thriller thrilling was missing.  Maybe Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy has spoilt me for films like this till I get used to them almost hitting the mark again.  Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy manages to be more thrilling with no chases and something like 5 gunshots than this does several chases and lead flying from automatic weapons.

So Killer Elite is not a bad film and not a great film.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy Longer Review: Bloody Brilliant

Ok I give in but really the first two reviews say everything I have to say.

Just back from the new, film adaptation of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

Gary Oldman (Smiley) doesn’t chew the scenery instead he achieves a zen like oneness with his surroundings with a nuanced performance that conveys as much, if not more, than many of his earlier roles.  The main supporting cast are note perfect in fact the supporting cast down to the smallest, none speaking part are perfect. Benedict Cumberbatch stood out for me as Peter Guillam, Smiley’s right hand, but come award season and there are going to be several potential contenders for best supporting actor here.

The plot is gripping.  The pacing is slow but perfect building to a climax without needing to resort to car chases or gunfights.  I love Spooks and it can be brilliant TV but it can’t touch Smiley’s world.  The last few years have seen the return of the slow burning thriller but this is the real deal from one of the original key texts of the genre.  I knew the outcome yet still I had to keep watching.

Everything else is pretty much on the money too from the film grading to the 1970s look to the sound track and sound effects to the cinematography.

This is a worthy, slightly more adult, successor to the 1979 BBC TV series.

There was the bizarre thing of one person at FACT laughing at moments as though it was the funniest comedy they’d ever seen and one woman as we were leaving who was overheard “I’ve read the book, I’ve seen the TV series and now the film and I still don’t get it”.

In January it was a case of if you went to one film at the Cinema this year it had to be The King’s Speech. If you go to a second go to Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy.  In fact if you didn’t go to The King’s Speech Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy – it’s as good.

Or to put it more succinctly…

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy is Bloody Brilliant.

Colombiana is the latest Luc Besson action film and this time he’s gone back to some of the themes that made him famous with Nikita and Leon – assassins and revenge.   That makes it hard to review without referring the earlier film.  Leon had three truly memorable characters: Leon (Jean Reno), Mathilda (Natalie Portman) and Stansfield (Gary Oldman).  Colombiana has Cataleya (Zoe Saldana) and a variety of less developed supporting characters.

Personally I’d like to have seen more made of one of:

• Danny Delanay (Michael Varta) and his relationship with Cataleya
• FBI Special Agent Ross (Lennie James) and his teams pursuit of Catelyna
• Emilio Restrepo (Cliff Curtis) and Catelyna family
• The bad guys/CIA played by Jordi Mollà, Beto Benites and Callum Blue

These were all sketched in and developing any of two of those could have elevated the story.  However doing so would either require changing the pacing by losing a set piece or increasing the length of the film by 15 to 30 minutes.

What it lacks in deep characterisation of villains and allies it makes up for by putting its central character on screen and action.  The opening chase scene in Columbia and the assassination in the police station are memorable and the third is clever.

The climactic encounter with the villains is the weakest of the set pieces but it remains coherent compared to the confused mess that was The Expendables ending.  The fight scene was reminiscent of those found in the Bourne films especially the later, Paul Greengrass, directed offerings with their handheld, in the fight style.

Another thing in its favour is a sense of humour closer to the quips of a good Bond film that is more effective than the forced comedy littered through many modern action films.

So yes, this isn’t Leon or a classic, but if you can get past that while Colombiana is a fun Luc Besson action movie.

Last week on Doctor Who we had pulp with Let’s Kill Hitler, this week we got horror with a twist of British Social Realism.

The horror is scary, fairy tailish horror rather than gross horror. It mixed up lots of classic horror elements of abduction horror, body horror with the transformation of people into the dolls, the dolls stalking people to “play” and the spooky nursery rhymes. It’s sinister, scary but I’d think it’s the kind of scare most kids will enjoy rather than cause nightmares. The revelation of the alien and the monsters was a nice twist nicely resolved.

The social realism is more in the background than front and central to the story. We see it in urban tower block, the flats, the bin bags and the nasty landlord. With the fantasy and horror elements it’s a bit Billy Liarish.

The set dressing for the dolls house and the housing estate are quite different but both nicely done. The dolls are a good one shot villain. Daniel Mays was a good choice for the main guest star. He brings an interesting combination of normality along with something slightly disquieting. He’s a real Dad rather than an idolised one which is perfect for the story.

There are some funny lines about making a house call and after the Doctor has a bit of a monologue “You’re not from social services are you?”

All in all Night Terrors was a good episode.