Charlie St. Cloud

There was a fair bidding war for the film rights to Ben Sherwood’s novel The Death and Life of Charlie St. Cloud. Though I haven’t read the book, you can see why there was such an interest as, though the storyline is pretty un-original, it does have that Nicolas Sparks feel to it and a number of those books have been made into films which have garnered some decent box office (though the quality of each film has varied). Unfortunately (for the producers anyway), Charlie St. Cloud hasn’t set the box office alight. The main reason must be that Zac Efron (despite being decent in Me and Orson Welles) just isn’t cut out as a dramatic leading man. In this kind of film, if the teen / tween audience isn’t interested, then who is? As for the film itself Efron stars as St. Cloud, a young man who, following the death of his younger brother, still “sees” him each night and plays baseball with him. Before long though a girl appears on the scene and Charlie has to decide whether to break a promise to his ghostly brother and spend time with his new squeeze instead. This hardly sounds exciting stuff. I guess the novel is a lot better, but this is a bland film. Far too slow in places and very heavy on the saccharine (though the target audience, if they’re not at home watching their HSM DVD's, will lap all that up) it’s odd that what should be a heart breaking story actually leaves you somewhat non-plussed (though you’re bound to be riled by St Cloud’s best friend sporting an awful Hollywood British accent). You may fall for the twists towards the end, and if you do then the film will probably be an improvement. All in all though, the film is a bit like Efron himself. Looks great, but is there any substance there?


The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
You’ll enjoy this if you’re a diehard fan of this genre, as opposed to a diehard Efron fan. If you’re a fan of neither, steer well clear. Rating: 5/10.

Made In Dagenham

Nigel Cole’s Made in Dagenham tells the story of the 1968 strike at the Ford Dagenham assembly plant by its female workers. The reason for the strike was the women campaigning for equal pay, and the long term effect eventually led to a change in the law. Though it’s an important footnote in British employment law, at first glance it doesn’t appear as a story that would make riveting cinema. However, though Cole’s film is unlikely to provoke second viewings, he’s smart enough to tap into the aspects of quintessential British film movie making that earn plaudits both here and abroad. We have social realism, mentions of the war, cold and rainy landscapes, dry wit, black humour, and, of course, plenty of swearing. This feels like a stable mate of Brassed Off, Billy Elliott and (though to a lesser extent) The Full Monty. Sally Hawkins takes the lead role and does a fine job, though she doesn’t really inhabit her character enough to persuade us that we’re not watching Sally Hawkins. As with a lot of ensemble films, it’s the lesser characters that are actually more interesting, though Cole finds it a bit of a struggle to get the balance right. However, despite some 1960’s clichés, it’s hard to be too down on the overall show as films like this must always be made in order to counterbalance the blockbusters. Plus, in this you get both Bob Hoskins and Miranda Richardson, and that’s definitely worth downing tools for.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A well acted interesting real life story. Unlikely to be a future DVD purchase though. Rating: 7/10

Tamara Drew

Here’s an odd little film. Tamara Drew (based on a newspaper comic strip that became a graphic novel) is a very loosely linked reworking of Thomas Hardy’s Far From The Madding Crowd. In the film, Tamara Drew (Gemma Arterton) returns to her childhood village as her old house is being put up for sale. Whilst there she stirs the interest of the man-folk of the hamlet, including an old flame (Luke Evans) and a slimy novelist (Roger Allam). Not that’s she interested in them for the moment, due to her new rocker boyfriend Dominic Cooper. The film is basically a commentary about love and lust, both consummated and desired. A problem lies in the fact that you feel very little sympathy for any of the characters. The majority are self absorbed, whilst others are wetter than the English Channel. Tamsin Grieg though scores points as Allam’s put upon wife, giving a performance of real devastation as things turn sour. In addition, Jody Long and Casey Shaw are excellent as teenage girls obsessed with Cooper. Director Stephen Frears smartly showing us just how dangerous young obsession can be. Your eyebrows may raise at the mention of Frears, as, yes, this does seems an unusual project for him to take on. He does his best, but the screenplay is too episodic for any directorial flushes to occur and the turn into some dark comedy at the end doesn’t fit well. Talking of not fitting well, this film could set a record for Arterton wearing the smallest pair of denim shorts since that girl in The Hitcher remake.


The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A few laughs to be had, but it’s hard to care what happens to anyone really. Give it an extra mark if you love cows though. Rating: 5/10.

Buried

Buried’s director Rodrigo Cortés tips his head early to Hitchcock in his film with a credit sequence that is a homage to Saul Bass. It’s a nice touch, but sadly the rest of the film fails to live up to The Master. Obviously, the relatively green Cortés can’t be expected to reach such highs so quickly, but his film fails to build up the relevant tension that was a mainstay of Hitch’s films from the get go. In Buried we following Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds), a US contractor working in Iraq, who has awoken to find himself buried alive in a coffin. Struggling to escape, he finds himself with a mobile phone and so begins a game of life as Conroy desperately tries to escape from his tomb before the air runs out. Direction wise Cortés employs smart tricks involving light and camera angles, but fails to engage the audience fully in Conroy’s dilemma. I think this is because despite a few explanations, the whole thing, even with suspension of disbelief, is somewhat implausible. When Conroy is making his mobile phone calls to various agencies, Cortés’s attempts to highlight US bureaucracy is completely lost amid some of the least convincing telephone voice “acting” heard in some time and a scene where the HR manager of Conroy’s company records a conversation between themselves is so laughably ludicrous I can’t believe it survived the test screenings. To be fair to Cortés the film never drags and that’s impressive for a 90 minute feature set in only one location. He’s also helped out by Reynolds who puts in a decent, if Hollywoodish, performance. So overall, not a film you’d bury forever, but not one you’d go out of your way to help with an air straw either.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This will be nightmare territory for some, but more seasoned veterans will be reaching for the Dutch version of The Vanishing. Rating: 5/10.

Takers

I saw Takers back to back with The Town, which was an interesting experience as they are both heist movies, but very different in their execution. Whilst, apart from the final scenes, The Town gave a more realistic and gritty approach to robberies, Takers goes the other way, what with the protagonists strolling around, smoking cigars, wearing the latest threads from GQ Magazine and generally living the high life. No going underground with these boys. In the film, the members of the gang (including Idris Elba, Paul Walker, Chris Brown and Hayden Christiensen) find their relaxed lifestyle of taking and then chillin’ interrupted by the release of a previous member of their gang from jail and a proposal he brings. Despite being wary, the gang prepare to undertake a new heist, whilst unbeknown to them, a cop (Matt Dillon) is also on their tail. With the exception of Elba and Dillon the acting here isn’t all that great (though you could say there is plenty of decent strutting on show) and there are clichéd characters ahoy, not least Dillon’s pre-occupied with the job bad father (yawn). However, director John Luessenhop neatly fits the pieces of the plot together, cutting between gang members discussing, arguing, planning, to the police who are also.....well…discussing, arguing and planning. The main heist scene is nicely executed, with a fair about of tension bought to the fore. On the down side, it all goes a bit John Woo towards the end and some people might take umbrage at the glamorisation of, well, theft (and that’s fair enough). If this looks like your cup of tea I think you’ll enjoy it enough not to feel robbed yourself.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This is an FHM magazine readers dream, but you can’t deny that it is, for all its faults, cool. Rating: 7/10.

The Town

Thought he hasn’t come back from the dead (he was still getting roles at least, albeit in complete dross), Ben Affleck continues his rehabilitation in the eyes of the movie going world by starring and directing in the above average The Town. Affleck’s been smart here as for all intents and purposes this is a heist movie, a genre that more often than not gets the thumbs up from a cinema audience, and coupled with the fact that this is set in Affleck’s beloved Boston, it’s a combination that provides thrills, drama and sight-seeing kicks for people with an interest in Bean Town. Set in the neighbourhood of Charlestown, Affleck stars as Doug MacRay, a member of a gang of armed robbers. Usually, cool, calm and calculated at what they do, things go awry at the start of the film when they find themselves having to take a hostage for the first time, Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall). Though they release her without harm, the fact she lives in Charlestown provides tension amongst the group. MacRay attempts to track her down and discover what she knows, but he soon finds himself in a situation he never expected. I’ll leave the storyline there so as not to spoil what happens next. Though what we do get is some great acting from Affleck and Hall, their scenes together being particularly believable. One delivery from Hall where she describes the kid-napping is the films performance high spot. Jeremy Renner as the group’s loose cannon is a cliché, but also gives good value. Less successful is John Hamm as a charisma free cop on the gang’s tale, whilst Chris Coopers cameo as MacRay’s father seems forced. On that note it is interesting to read that the original cut that Affleck produced for the studio was four hours in length. I guess a lot of character development has ended up on the cutting room floor, but what’s left still works to an extent. Affleck keeps the robbery scenes short, which may be frustrating for some, but is realistic. In addition, he explores the unspoken relationship between cops and robbers, including one memorable scene where a policeman stumbles across the gang fresh from their latest heist. Affleck loves Boston no doubt and along with the numerous sweeping helicopter shots of the city the films finale takes place at Fenway Park. It’s a good finish, but the film moves into self indulgent territory a bit too much here and Affleck and co stick out like a sore thumb as they undertake a further robbery, looking more like an advert for a fashion chain, rather than hardened robbers. If this all sounds a touch familiar, well, it is. There are numerous comparisons that can be made with the vastly superior Heat. However, on it’s own The Town is still a decent production and it’ll be interesting to see what the phoenix that is Affleck applies his directorial eye to next.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Some may mutter about a further ode to Boston from Affleck, but strong acting and decent direction mean you can give him some good will (sorry).Rating: 7/10

I'm Still Here

The irony of the title of the film I’m Still Here, is that anyone who can manage to say that in the cinema after sitting through this rubbish until the end is deserving of a medal. The only thing that would have saved this film is if it was still a mystery while you watched it as to whether you were watching a mock documentary or that Joaquin Phoenix had really gone a bit tonto. However, now that director Casey Affleck had admitted the whole thing was a hoax all you’re left with is a spectacularly unfunny experiment where the film’s most famous sequence (the interview with David Letterman) has already been viewed Ad nauseam on the internet. For those that are unaware, the film follows Phoenix as he announces his retirement from acting and decides to re-launch himself as a hip-hop artist. The fact that Phoenix and Affleck planned the whole thing to see how taken in people would be might have been fun for them at the time, but as a feature film it’s desperately lacking any sort of structure and the social comment they are trying to make is lost amongst Phoenix’s mumbling, plenty of male nudity and a defecation scene that really plumbs the depths. It’s lucky that Phoenix and Affleck have plenty of kudos in their back catalogue otherwise this would have been the ultimate career killer. What a waste of everyone’s time.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Like a 5 minute video that you make with your mates that only you find funny. Or in this case, stretched to an hour and 45 minutes that no-one finds funny. Rating: 2/10.

Winter's Bone

If you’re looking for a film that is the complete antithesis of the usual blockbuster fare then Winter’s Bone will probably be the film for you. This story of an Ozark teenager who, after discovering that her absent Dad has put up the family home as a bail bond, must not only try and track him down, but care for her mother, brother and sister at the same time, is (mainly) filmed on location, has very little dialogue and not a special effect in sight. What it does have though is a great central performance from the relatively unknown Jennifer Lawrence as the teenage girl (Ree) in question. Her journey to find her father, which takes in the crystal meth making criminal fraternity, feels less like an obligation, but more like the fact that this is just how life is for the people living in such a remote area. Whether it’s skinning squirrels, getting beaten up or having a gun pointed in her face, Ree just gets on with it with barely a shrug. The fact that Lawrence lived as Ree does as part of her preparation has paid off in spades. Filmed on location in Missouri, the cinematography is fantastic, with the houses looking and feeling real because, well, they are real. In fact, so authentic is the feel of the film that, as Ree crackles through the forest, with the cold air exhaling from her mouth and nose the film almost takes on a documentary edge. Offering great support is John Hawkes, cast as Ree’s uncle Teardrop. Hawkes is probably best well known for his soft character in Deadwood, but here he comes across as a serious bastard. As the film progresses though you’ll begin to warm to Teardrop as some semblance of honour and pride begin to shine through, all thanks to Hawkes’ nice performance. So, this is all sounding great, right? But….but….but……this film is seriously slow, almost funereal at times. No doubt things aren’t rushed in the Ozark region, but watching such sluggish pace in a cinema is a big struggle. Whether this is a problem of the film being adapted from page to screen is hard to say as I haven’t read the book, but sometime director Debra Granik obviously felt that Ree’s journey will be enough to take you in full-stop. I’m not so sure. This also leads to a problem that if your mind does start to wander, you’ll probably miss something crucial to the story meaning that the final few scenes will be confusing to say the least.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Looks amazing with two great performances, but the leisurely pace may have you fidgeting in your seat, no matter how many great shots of the mountains there are. Rating: 6/10.

Cyrus

Jay and Mark Duplass are the brothers behind a number of well received short movies, but they find it a bit of a struggle to stretch their latest output into feature length entertainment. In addition you should be aware that the Duplass brothers have been labelled “mumblecore” in the past, and it’s safe to say this film won’t be for everyone due to the minimal dialogue and pedestrian pace. To be fair to the brothers though they at least get a bit of mileage out of the hardly original concept, that of a love triangle between mother, son and new man on the scene. Playing the respective parts are Marisa Tomei, Jonah Hill and John C. Reilly. Reilly plays John, a divorcee who meets Molly (Tomei) and they get on great. However, John soon discovers that Molly has a son, the eponymous Cyrus, who isn’t at all happy that John is starting to come between himself and his mother. Mild shenanigans ensue. Reilly’s performance as a sad sack loser is hardly a push for him, but it’s his scenes with Hill where the film briefly sparks into life. Following Reilly’s performance from bemusement to confusion to anger as he discovers the increasingly odd relationship between Cyrus and Molly is fun to watch. Hill himself is hilarious at times, and a scene where he plays John his awful music and just stands there starting at him whilst doing it is very funny indeed. Having said that, if you’ve seen the trailer, you’ve already seen some of said scene already, and I can actually only recall one other scene that made me laugh that I hadn’t already seen in the trailer. Smart marketing to get the crowds in perhaps, but, unless you’re desperate to know how things turn out in the end, if you’ve seen the trailer for Cyrus, you’ve basically seen Cyrus.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Looks out of place on the big screen, but, if you haven’t seen the trailer that is, there’s enough here (particularly the scenes between Reilly and Hill) to raise the occasional laugh. Rating: 5/10.

The Kid

Based on the bestselling book by Kevin Lewis, The Kid (which recalls Lewis’s upbringing), this film version is one of the more disturbing films you’ll see all year. Though it does have a happy ending, it’s a hell of a journey to get there. Lewis himself was subjected to horrific abuse as a child and though the film has been toned down (director Nick Moran sensibly realising that less is more) these scenes are pretty difficult to watch still. The main reason is due to Natascha McElhone who plays Lewis’ mum (Gloria) in the film. Under a ton of make up the usually stunning McElhone has been turned into what can only be described as a beast of a person, complete with a mouth that shoots off F and C words like an expletive machine gun. The character is horrendous to watch and it’s a great performance from McElhone, so much so that the real Kevin Lewis had difficulty being on set when McElhone was in character. Strong acting is prevalent throughout the whole film from the teenage Lewis (Augustus Prew) to the young adult Lewis played by Rupert Friend. Friend is great, giving Lewis a real vulnerability that manifests itself in such naivety you almost wish you could burst through the cinema screen and save him from the various people prepared to exploit him. One person who does try to help is Ioan Gruffudd, in a small role as a school teacher, showing us that gumph like the Fantastic Four is well beneath him. The film does meander at times, but at least that will give you time to appreciate Moran’s nice eye for detail in terms of the 1980’s setting. Despite this being a difficult watch, The Kid is a shot in the arm for the British film industry, especially after recent dross like Wild Target.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Great acting across the board and though it’s very dark in places, you’ll be rewarded if you stay with it until the end. A possible purchase of the book may well follow as well. Rating: 7/10.

The Other Guys

Make no mistake, The Other Guys isn’t a particularly great film. However, compared to the similarly themed Cop Out, its Adam McKay’s latest outing with Will Ferrell that wins the shoot out with bullets to spare. The film has a good start with McKay doing an outrageous parody of buddy cop movies with Dwayne Johnson and Samuel L Jackson hamming up the screen gleefully alongside a knowingly ridiculous car chase. A plot device means we then focus on Gamble (Ferrell) and Hoitz (Mark Wahlberg) a pair of mismatched cops (yawn) who eventually leave their usual desk bound duties and get out there where the action is. The storyline that unfolds, investigating Steve Coogans shady business, is basically a MacGuffin for a number of scenes where Ferrell and Wahlberg knock heads. This works up to a point (the scene where Wahlberg meets Ferrell’s sexy wife is great) but after a while it becomes somewhat tiresome, not helped by the continued confusion whether Wahlberg is actually a great straight man or as wooden as they come. Ferrell is the star of the show though, pretty much carrying the film from start to finish. McKay could have had something a bit better here overall if he had trimmed the running time by a good 20 minutes, and the films social commentary falls flat on its face as the target audience will be laughing at Ferrell's antics as opposed to caring what a Ponzi scheme is. All in all this is quite a disjointed film, but there are enough scenes that work to at least justify the entrance fee.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This is the Ferrel show, which is a good thing as McKay is still struggling to find the magic touch that bought us Anchorman. Rating: 6/10.

Devil

Devil has one of the more eye opening scenes of the year, that of an upside down Philadelphia (though I guess some people may think the projectionist has goofed). It’s a strange, but ultimately intriguing start and definitely the best use of a city landscape since the opening credits of Panic Room. Can the rest of the film live up to this startling beginning though? The first thing to mention is that, yes, the film (based on a story by M Night Shayamanlan) does seem to, ahem, “borrow”, from the similarly themed Elevated. The main storyline of Devil concerns 5 strangers who become stuck in a lift in a sky scraper. Pretty soon though feelings of discomfort and claustrophobia give way to something much darker. The film then essentially becomes a two hander as we flick between the inhabitants of the lift and the struggles of the security and police outside trying to release them. Though the title of the film is somewhat of a giveaway, director John Erick Dowdle does a neat job of keeping the audience guessing and most reveals are cleverly in line with the characters finding things out for themselves at the same time as the film-goer. On the down-side, despite a couple of decent scares, the film really isn’t all that scary and all in all has a TV movie film to it or perhaps a longer Twilight Zone / Outer Limits episode. The cardboard cut out characters in the lift don’t do much to change this perception either. Despite all that, the short running time means it doesn’t outstay its welcome and it’s almost a breath of fresh air for a horror film these days to attempt some smarts over out and out scares.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
You won’t be biting your nails, but there’s enough intrigue here to keep your interest until the final reveal. Rating: 6/10.

The Switch

The Switch will be forgotten by most after they have watched it, but it will go down as a cinematic footnote as the first film released by Miramax since Disney sold it on. The film itself has an interesting start where Wally (Jason Bateman) accidentally spills the sperm of a donor that his best friend, Kassie (Jennifer Aniston), was going to use to become pregnant with. Panicking, Wally (drunkenly) replaces the sperm with some of his own. Fast forward seven years and Kassie, now with kid, meets up with Wally again and before long Wally starts to see some resemblance between himself and said child. Eventually he recalls what he did that night seven years ago and is torn between what to do next, especially as he holds romantic feelings for Kassie, though this isn’t helped by her relationship with who she perceives to be the donor (Patrick Wilson in effortless form). Additional able support comes from Jeff Goldblum (so laid back he appears mildly drunk in some scenes) and the ever improving Juliette Lewis. Hmm, I’ve just realised I’ve typed half the plot, but you’d have to had never seen a rom-com before to not know what direction this one goes in. To be fair, this isn’t all that bad with Bateman giving a turn that garners the audience’s sympathy and Aniston hitting emotional depths not seen from her for a long long time. Thrown in a few belly laughs and you have an above average effort for the target audience to enjoy.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Standard fare, but this is an improvement on Aniston’s recent output (not difficult that, I know), Bateman is good and there’s enough laughs to see you through the obvious screenplay. Rating: 6/10.

The Runaways

The Runaways is a film based on the book by the band’s lead singer Cherie Currie and therefore it’s no surprise to find the character of Currie taking up a fair portion of screen time as we go through the history of the band from formation to break up. Unfortunately the film is hamstrung from the start as Dakota Fanning’s portrayal of Currie is pretty dull despite Currie being the leader of a female punk band and having family problems to deal with as well. However, Fanning’s performance can probably be laid at the feet of director Floria Sigismondi, as the film itself is far too tame to truly reflect the angst and anger of the band. Sigismondi is one of the more original music video directors around so it’s a surprise (and a shame) that the direction here is so bland. Kirsten Stewart fares better as the more well known Joan Jett, sporting the worlds blackest hair and giving off the required balls (so to speak). However, the highlight of the film is Michael Shannon’s performance as the bands bonkers manager Kim Fowley. As sleazy as he is hilarious, Shannon gives the film the energy it lacks as he bounces around the screen. If only Sigismondi had been able to channel some of that electricity into the rest of the film. As a history of the band, apparently the film is a fairly accurate portrayal and therefore should provide some interest for music buffs. However, the problem remains that despite a film about a pioneering female rock band, you’ll have little interest in following it up after the final credits.


The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Worth watching for Shannon, but the big screen feels too much for the usually innovative Sigismondi. Rating: 5/10.

The Last Exorcism

There’s been plenty of hype about The Last Exorcism already in respect of its hefty box office compared to its (fairly) minimal production costs and an ending that has had people pretty miffed. The film has also drawn comparisons with The Blair Witch Project, in terms of profit ratio, the found footage premise and a viral marketing campaign. However, I wouldn’t bracket this film anywhere near Blair Witch in terms of effectiveness, but it does have a modicum of originality that pushes its head above water level. The film follows the Reverend Cotton Marcus (Patrick Fabian), who after agreeing to take part in a documentary designed to show exorcism as fake, travels to a remote farmhouse with two members of the documentary crew in order to “cure” a teenage girl called Nell (Ashley Bell) who’s father claims is possessed by the devil. To say more would be to spoil the few twists that follow. Though the film is unlikely to raise the hairs on your arms too much it is aptly marshaled by director Daniel Stamm who also coaxes a decent performance from Fabian who is believable as the Reverend trying to get the bottom of what is going on as the mayhem erupts around him, as opposed to running a mile as most mere mortals would do. Speaking of twists this is worth watching for Bell’s contortion alone, as her hyper mobility meant no body churning special effects were necessary in post production. And that ending? Well, it goes for shock value rather than cold chills (and yes, it is stolen from another film) but it doesn’t detract from the film at all and actually makes sense in the fact that, in movie folk-law anyhow, as soon as you take the man out of the city and put him in the woods, bad things are always bound to happen.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Despite a poster and title that feels like you’ve seen it all before this is a smart little film. Rating: 6/10.

Going The Distance

Here’s a rom-com with all the standards intact. Boy meets girl, boy gets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl again….or does he? In Going The Distance, the fly in the ointment of the relationship between Erin (Drew Barrymore) and Garrett (Justin Long) is that one lives in New York whilst the other shacks up in San Francisco. Can they make it work? Though this is by the numbers, there is fair chemistry between Barrymore and Long and the problems of the long distance relationship are handled in a realistic manner. The humour is the most interesting element of this film though as it’s a lot cruder than you would expect from the usual Barrymore fluff. In that respect, the film this mostly resembles is the recent She’s Out Of My League. Whether you think this works or not will probably make or break the film for you, as there’s not much funny stuff coming from either main lead and so laughs have to be garnered from elsewhere. As is usual in these types of films it’s the supporting characters that can steal the show and whilst there isn’t any comedy gold here they still provide enough chuckles to keep the film moving along. Overall, you get the impression that director Nanette Burstein wanted the film to fall in the middle of cheese and vulgarity, but the result is a film that feels confused at times about what it really wants to be. Having said that, it’s still a lot better than some of the more recent output in this particular genre.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Decent stuff from Barrymore and Long just about keep this above water level, but some may still find it too far adrift for rescue. Rating: 6/10.

Dinner For Schmucks

Many moons ago I was going through a phase of watching as many French films that the local video shop (video shop!) had to rent. One of those films was Le diner de cons, an OK, if instantly forgettable comedy in which a group of friends invite a supposed “idiot” to dinner for their own amusement. It hardly needs a Hollywood remake but, lo and behold, we now have Dinner For Schmucks. Though it is only loosely based on the original, this is still spectacularly overblown and further evidence of director Jay Roach’s waning powers. The main “idiot” in the film is played by Steve Carell and he provides virtually all of the laughs. In fact, he pretty much carries the film on his shoulders as many other characters are flatter than week old sparkling water. The exception being Jemaine Clement who’s performance as a sleazy artist doesn’t garner as many laughs as it should but it’s good to see him playing something a world away from his FOTC persona. That the film is outrageously silly doesn’t mean it’s automatically bad of course, but there are too many story lines going on at once and the final idiot’s dinner is very low on laughs. On the positive side, the film does end on a heartening note at least and Carell’s banter with Paul Rudd (who has reluctantly selected Carell as his “idiot”) does provide the film with some semblance of backbone. Overall though, this is just further proof of Hollywoods original ideas barrel running dry.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Too OTT with many gags falling flat, but Carell just about stops things from being a total disaster. Rating: 5/10.

Grown Ups

Before Grown Ups, Dennis Dugan’s previous two films were Don’t Mess With The Zohan and I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry. With this latest effort he must surely be one of the front runners for an award for the worst three films ever directed in a row. Grown Ups is an appalling unfunny film and the only emotion you’ll get from it is anger at the money you’ve just spent watching this turgid overblown excuse of a film. I can’t even be bothered to describe the plot but when you have Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Chris Rock, David Spade and Rob Schneider in a film together it’s hardly going to be a laugh a minute is it? If you think that statement is rubbish you can count the total number of decent films they have been in combined on the fingers of one hand (or two hands if you’re being generous). The film is awash with unlikable characters and unfunny jokes, and a scene at the end is so patronising you literally want to claw the smug main protagonist’s faces off the cinema screen. The only reason it avoids zero marks is due to a few zingers at the start that you can use on your mates, and I can’t even remember any of them anymore.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
It’s so bad it makes Couple’s Retreat look like Citizen Kane. Now that’s bad. Rating: 1/10.

Piranha

If you’re a horror fan then you’re probably a fan of Alexandra Aja already. He’s not to everyone’s tastes but arguably his films have the combination that makes successful horror films tick, that of the balance between tension and gore. It’s interesting then that for Piranha Aja puts all tension to one side, employing only a few cheap jump scares and concentrating mainly on the splatter. Throw in some dodgy acting and plenty of T & A (or in this case plenty of T & A) and you have the makings of a classic B-Picture. Or do you? What makes a B-Picture is if the film-makers are knowingly in on the gag as they make the movie. I’m not sure Aja thought about it either way, but this does lack the knowing in-joke humour that makes something like Lake Placid a cult favourite (or indeed the quaint naffness of the original Piranha). Having said that Piranha is still entertaining if you’re a fan of outrageous gore as Aja delivers it in bucket loads. The set up is simple: Spring Break, Piranha’s attack. That’s all you need to know. Elisabeth Shue takes the lead role as the sheriff trying to convince everyone that carnage is imminent and does a decent job, but she appears to be playing it straight whilst others ham it up, particularly Christopher Lloyd in a cameo as a marine biologist. But, it’s the grue that people will come for and you won’t be disappointed on that front. Best not to eat anything beforehand unless you’re comfortable with people being eaten alive, severed limbs, crushed bodies and, literally, rivers of blood. Two deaths in particular are memorable. One involves Eli Roth (haters of the man will be loving that one) and another is the unfortunate after effect of a girl getting her hair caught in a speedboat motor. Definitely one for the rewind button on future DVD showings that one. Once the mayhem subsides and you’re left with an un-thrilling final scene of peril (and a set up for a sequel) you will have made your own mind up about whether this is good, bad or so bad it’s good. Whatever you think, (the annoying Jaws homage aside) you can’t deny it entertains the target audience.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Gore-blimey! Fans of the claret will be royally entertained, though there isn’t much else cinematically that even nibbles the quality bone. Rating: 6/10.

The Girl Who Played With Fire

It wasn’t until after I had seen The Girl Who Played With Fire that I found out the film (along with Dragon Tattoo and Hornet’s Nest) was actually a shortened edit of six 90 minute episodes previously shown on Swedish television which covered the whole of the so-called Millennium trilogy. Whilst this didn’t appear to have a significant impact on the first film, it certainly has here. The main problem with Fire is that so much is crammed into the running time it’s impossible to keep up with everything. Some characters come and go with virtually no relevance to the plot (though I suspect this is the result of the snipping) and the overall storyline quickly becomes confused. Daniel Alfredson’s direction doesn’t help as the tone is uneven throughout the film (similar to the first film) and the ending feels like a below par horror, and a ridiculous one at that. If you haven’t seen the first film then don’t bother with this as there’s no set up for new comers. The one bright spark is Noomi Rapace’s performance which is so good it’s already impossible to see anyone else playing the part with such confidence. It’s a shame that this second film fails to grip like the first, which was a smart mixture of grit and intrigue. This is just dull. Perhaps if the whole Swedish TV Series is eventually released on DVD we’ll get the fuller picture. In the meantime though we await Hornet’s Nest. Which way will that one go?

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Rapace is great, but this is a long way off the first film due to the confusing nature of the plot and some dull direction. Rating: 4/10.

Salt

In respect of her film career, and much like the Coen Brothers, Angelina Jolie seems to have a nice balance of mixing “one for them” (i.e. the studios), with “one for me”. The studio films, of course, being mainly mindless blockbusters. Her latest film, Salt, fits into the first category, and whilst it’s still a gone from the memory the second you leave the cinema special, whilst you’re watching it you’ll definitely be entertained. There are two main reasons for this, Jolie herself, and director Philip Noyce. In the film Jolie takes the role of Evelyn Salt, an employee of the CIA who goes on the run after a Russian spy spills the beans to the CIA that the Russian President will be murdered by an assassin named….Evelyn Salt. Not a bad pitch as it goes and it leads to a decent game of is she / isn’t she? Jolie is great in this, toning down the sexiness of similar roles and giving us a more rounded individual who can mix emotion and smarts amongst the mayhem. Along with Jolie there is decent support from Liev Schreiber as her boss at the CIA, Ted Winter (Has there ever been a more CIA name than that in cinema history?). Noyce is an old hand at this game and moves the story along at a breakneck pace, getting a bottom kicking performance from Jolie and utilising some cracking and what appears to be mainly CGI free stunts, particularly in a hair-raising motorbike / car / truck chase scene (Knight and Day hang your head in shame). Having said all that there are plot holes galore and Noyce doesn’t leave much room for any character development. Still, when silliness is this much fun, who cares?

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Thrills, spills and Jolie in top form more than make up for the implausibility of the plot. Rating: 7/10.

The Last Airbender

M Night Shayamalan bashing has been a favourite past time for people for a while now and if it wasn’t for his worthy first few films he surely would be struggling to get anything green lit following on from such disasters as Lady In The Water and the truly dire The Happening. So now we have the bizarrely titled The Last Airbender, though, thanks to James Cameron, this is at least an improvement on Avatar: The Last Airbender. The film is based on the animated TV series of the same name and concerns a world that is divided into four nations (Water, Air, Earth and Fire). The fire nation is attempting to take over the other three nations, but is hindered by the appearance of an Avatar (someone who is a master at utilising all the above elements) who defends them from the fire nation’s assaults. If it all sounds very childish, well, it is. Maybe this is why it has had such negative reviews as whilst not many adults or older children will get much from this younger children should definitely enjoy the simple spectacle, especially as some of the more negative aspects of the film will go over their heads. The worst of the lot being the awful acting. I’ve always felt Shayamalan isn’t an actor’s director and this is bad even by his standards (not helped by the child playing the Avatar having zero acting experience before this film). This is a serious problem for the film, which even some decent special effects can’t cover up. Overall, this is still way below prime Shayamalan, without much evidence of a recovery soon, but at least one demographic will enjoy his latest outing.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Some terrible acting, but a younger audience won’t notice such woodenness amongst some pretty nifty CGI. Rating: 5/10.

Scott Pilgrim vs The World

Every now and then you get the perfect marriage of director and material. Scott Pilgrim vs The World is such a situation with Edgar Wright taking Bryan Lee O’Malley’s graphic novels and exploding them onto screen with a colourful mixture of outstanding visuals and dry wit. It’s hardly surprising that Wright is so assured with the material when you consider his Spaced calling card, to which Scott Pilgrim bears more than a passing resemblance, though one that is slicker and more confident (helped by the additional millions of dollars, of course). In the film Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera), a bass guitarist in a band, falls for Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Two problems with this though. One: he already has a girlfriend, Knives (Ellen Wong), Two: Ramona has seven evil exes who Pilgrim must defeat in order to win her hand. Of course, just watching one fight after another can become dull pretty quickly but the source material has a few tricks up its sleeve in order to spice things up a bit. However Wright does got a little over the top at times though with some of the editing and lighting of certain scenes, meaning the average person might find themselves straining their eyes whilst anyone with epilepsy will struggle to watch the screen at all. The exes themselves are a bit of a mixed bunch with Chris Evans over-hamming his to alarming effect whilst a near unrecognisable Brandon Routh provides a few laughs. In terms of the acting overall it’s actually Wong and Kieran Culkin (as Pilgrim’s roommate) that win the plaudits from their relatively minor roles. Winstead is off screen too much to make a real impact (with the exception of her hair) and Cera again produces a performance which continues the mystery as to why he keeps getting such plum roles. However, this is Wright’s film, and despite it at times being a little bit too cute for its own good and an ending that sadly doesn’t provide the knockout blow the audience deserves, he moves the film along at a furious pace with innovative visuals and many laugh out loud moments. Throw in the rocking soundtrack as well and you have a film that, whilst it may alienate the older demographic, is entertaining, wears its heart on its sleeve and feels like a breath of fresh air.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A difficult to market film has meant a difficult relationship with the box office. A huge shame as Scott Pilgrim contains more originality than a million Expendables ever could. Rating: 8/10.

Coco Chanel & Igor Stravinsky

Though not a direct follow on from Coco Before Chanel, CoCo Chanel and Igor Stravinsky can be enjoyed as a companion piece to Audrey Tatou’s effort, but this also falls into the same trap of that film in the the fact that there’s plenty of style, but little substance. As the title suggests the film is about the relationship between Chanel and Stravinksy, but despite decent performances from Anna Mouglasis (who stalks around the film like a demure pussy cat) and Mads Mikkelsen, their relationship feels too cold and distant for the audience to engage with them emotionally. In addition, though the film is beautifully shot, there are far too many periods of silence as Mouglasis and Mikkelsen look longingly at each other. In fact, on leaving the cinema you may even be able to convince yourself that there wasn’t a single piece of dialogue from about the half-way point of the film. The main problem though is despite being two of the most famous people of the 20th century very little is shown of their respective “jobs” meaning the film could really be about any old couple just moping around lovey-dovey in a big house. Hardly thrilling stuff. There is a neat scene with the invention of Chanel No 5, but like the impressive looking opening credits, such smarts are in too short supply.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Visually superb, but the main story fails to energise the characters relationship or their individual genius. Rating: 4/10.

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Jerry Bruckheimer can be an acquired taste and while he has produced a fair number of turkeys to go with the hits, it can’t be denied his back catalogue always attempts to entertain in some way. He also knows an opportunity when he sees one and after the silly but entertaining National Treasure films it’s no surprise he reunites director and star of said series to silly, but yes, entertaining effect. What with that title you’ll be unsurprised to hear the film is an expanded version of said scene in Fantasia. Things don’t start too well though with a prologue which is designed to give the background to the story, but is rushed through and somewhat confusing. Director Jon Turteltaub is clearly interested in moving things on as quick as possible and before long we are into the main crux of the film, that of Balthazar Blake (Nicolas Cage), a sorcerer in New York, and his battle with Maxim Horvath (Alfred Molina), whilst taking on Dave Stutler (Jay Baruchel) as his apprentice (natch). Cage and Baruchel are in good form and bounce off each other well, but it’s Molina who is the star, gleefully hamming it up and proving once again he is one of the most versatile actors around. The down side to that though is that sidekick Toby Kebbell is acted off the screen. Other downers are that the female roles are also underwritten as not much more than scream queens and that the ending of the film is a tad underwhelming. That said, this has the nice feel of an old fashioned Disney film. There are silly character names, evil bad guys (but, not that evil) and a good sprinkling of laughs. It’s a surprise then when you consider it’s flopped at the box office. There could be a few reasons for this, but I don’t think the actual title of the film exactly has people rushing down the local multiplex. Plus, at a very brief glance, the posters and trailer make it look like a Harry Potter knock off. A shame really, but I’d hope something this fun will find a second life on DVD.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This is lightweight, but decent effects and good chemistry between Cage and Baruchel nicely compliment the thrills and spills. Rating: 7/10

Knight and Day

It’s been a while since we’ve had a film that has emerged from good old Development Hell and Knight and Day is solid proof that if some films are that painful to get onto the screen in the first place they’re probably best being strangled at birth. You can read elsewhere about the various stars and directors that have been attached to this vehicle in the past, but its Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz who won (ahem) through in the end with James Mangold picking up the directorial duties. I’d love to know if Mangold ever realised what a disaster this was going to be, but the fact he dabbled in the screenplay suggests he knew not all was right. Speaking of that, over its various guises the screenplay has had over ten people at least get their mitts on it (seven of them alone for this final version) and boy does it show. This has been a disaster at the box office, with the blame seemingly being placed on Cruise and Diaz. However, this is such a confused movie that I think that even Grant and Hepburn in their prime would have struggled to rescue this. In terms of plot, we have Cruise starring as a (rogue) secret agent who ends up with Diaz by his side as they fight to stay alive against the usual shadowy forces. Hmm, it needed seven people to come up with that? Anyway, despite a decent opening scene, it soon becomes apparent that this film is a series of action scenes and not much else. Nothing wrong with that in some cases of course, but usually it needs to be backed up in other areas. That doesn’t happen here. Cruise seems unsure whether to play it straight or not, Diaz (looking oddly unsexy) seems to have just graduated from the University of Over Acting, the tone is all confused (especially in some violent scenes) and the special effects are pretty ropey. Are there any plus points? If you got a free ticket you might not be so critical, but people who did pay have spoken out meaning that other lucky ones have now paid with their feet.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A mildly entertaining start very quickly gives way to utter gubbins. The expression about something that you can’t polish is something the studio obviously has never heard of. Rating: 3/10.

The A-Team

The concept of the A-Team TV series was ludicrous enough to begin with so it’s hardly surprising that Joe Carnahan (putting on a Michael Bay mask it seems) takes the mayhem all the way up to 11 with this film version. Everything must be bigger, faster and louder. Better though? In some ways, yes. In a lot of other ways, no. Carnahan as director was certainly an eyebrow-raising choice to handle this picture and it’s hard to think this is the same guy behind the blistering Narc (though, I suppose Smokin’ Aces was a sign of carnage to come). Has Carnahan just taken the dollar with this one though? If you consider he was originally slated to direct M-I:III until leaving due to the old conflict of views (i.e. you assume Carnahan wanted a darker tone), you would assume a summer flick like this with virtually no real plot or characterisation wouldn’t be his cup of tea at all. In terms of the casting you are probably aware of who has taken the four main roles. Not much thinking has gone into who plays who, but in effect it doesn’t really matter, as the main problem with the film is that it has little feel of the A-Team to it. Whilst the actors do a good job (unlike poor Jessica Biel hopelessly mis-cast as a cop), after 30 minutes you will have forgotten that they are actually mean to be the A-Team characters as they come across as just another gang of misfits fighting the baddies whilst trying not to fight amongst themselves. Indeed, the occasional efforts to inject any A-Team related mythology (BA’s fear of flying etc) stick out like a sore thumb. Carnahan at least does try to entertain by throwing together a whole load of action scenes. Some are great, but the majority are heavily reliant on special effects and any excitement quickly dissipates as things become more silly. Whilst The Losers, a film with a similar premise and a similar lack of a grasp of reality, did entertain, this just bores. The ending is also a huge let down though, with any smarts lost amongst an utterly ludicrous amount of further un-thrilling CGI. The tag-line for this film was “There is No Plan B”. Never a truer word spoken.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Baring little real resemblance to the original TV show, this is by the numbers film making for its target audience, who should at least be entertained. Rating: 5/10

Splice

Though it wasn’t a spectacular burst onto the scene, Vincenzo Natali’s Cube was one of the smarter breakthrough hits of 1997 and the director looked to have a promising future. However, though he hasn’t rested on his laurels, Natali hasn’t had any real mainstream exposure since and so his latest film, Splice, is interesting in the fact that this is a higher profile release than his previous few films, including a fairly heavy hitter (Adrian Brody) as part of the cast. Unfortunately, Splice is an apt description of the film itself as we get a number of genres all trying to fit in together, whereas the old adage of less is more would have produced a more entertaining outcome. The story concerns Clive (Brody) and Elsa (Sarah Polley), two scientists who push the boundaries of their work, and their morals, by splicing together human and animal DNA. An eventual result of this is Dren (Delphine Chanéac), a hybrid creature who Clive and Elsa eventually decide to raise in the name of research. I can’t really say much else without giving too much away, but as this has been marketed partly as a horror film you won’t be surprised to hear that things with Dren do not turn out all that well. The issue of the marketing is a pertinent issue here as it really is difficult to describe what genre of film this is. Science Fiction, horror, thriller, comedy (including one spectacular scene of unintentional comedy) all rear their genetically modified heads at some point. It’s just too much of a mixture though and shifting the tone on a regular basis upsets the balance of the drama in the film. Going further into this point, taking the film as a drama is actually the best idea as Natali does a good job in portraying the relationship between all three characters and a decent twist towards the end does explain what had appeared to be some earlier cod philosophy. There are also some interesting questions raised here regarding such experimental use of DNA (especially in the film’s final shot) but they become lost during the films somewhat bizarre finale, which includes further unintentional guffaws and a very dickey rape scene.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A promising start quickly dissolves into a film which, much like the character it is about, is unsure what its true indentity is. Rating: 5/10.

The Expendables

Whatever you may think of this film or Sylvester Stallone in general, you have to give Sly credit for getting together the throw back cast that he has for this. It's a good thing too, as if it wasn't for the intriguing cast this would probably have died a quick death. As it is though, its hit box office gold on both sides of the Atlantic as audiences have flocked to see Stallone, Lundren, Willis and Arnie flex their aching limbs one last time. However, the advertising has been a bit mis-leading as Willis and Schwarzenegger only appear in a cameo scene, albeit one that does finish with the film's funniest line. Therefore, the relatively whipper snapping Li and Statham step in to help with the carnage. In terms of acting it’s all pretty wooden, but Mickey Rourke has a surprising touching scene which appears to have been accidentally cut in from The Wrestler. As for the plot, it’s a rehash of an old favourite, but Stallone is only interested in one thing here guns, explosions and fighting, delivering it in spades. Though not on a scale of the gore-fest that was the last Rambo film, Stallone still lets it all go, especially during the ear-bleeding crazily edited last 30 minutes. This film will have a specific target audience and regardless of its quality that audience has coughed up the dough to see it. Therefore, if you want a quick nostalgia fix then this should do just about enough to entertain, but the over-riding emotion is one of a tired old formula that has had its time and I doubt the mooted follow up will make as much moolah as this one.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Friday night fodder in extremis, but hardly anything cinematic or memorable. Rating: 5/10.

Cats & Dogs: The Revenge Of Kitty Galore

This film has had some scathing reviews, but I'm not entirely sure why. It's a film about talking cats and dogs....its not meant to be Casablanca. Having said that there is only one audience for this and that is tiny tots or cat and dogs lovers up for some supreme silliness. If you're neither of that demographic then, OK, you really won't like this. For the rest you can enjoy an admittedly unoriginal plot (cats and dogs joining forces? Never!) that throws in mostly visuals gags via some CGI that ranges from amusingly good to amusingly bad. Of course, you can also play the guess the actor voicing the animal game, if you're up to the mark on the Hollywood C-List that is. The thing I found most interesting about this film though was the budget, $85 million. $85 million! Where has that money gone? Obviously this film is effects heavy, but I can't believe that it was to that tune of money. Unless the answer is that Chris O'Donnell demands a particularly expensive rider these days. So, this isn't good nor bad, but if you think this is rubbish because its not Inception, then you need a dog house all to your self.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Tough to rate this one, but I can't believe you won't get some enjoyment out of this if you're one of the above mentioned target audience. Rating: 6/10

Shrek Forever After

In relation to my comments regarding Toy Story 3 I approached Shrek Forever After with a certain degree of scepticism in respect of its 3D element. Is there really a massive clamour for a fourth Shrek film? Shouldn’t Dreamworks come up with something new? It’s possible the answers to the above were “No” and “Yes”, or at least, they were until Dreamworks thought of the big green they could make by having their big green up in gimmicky 3D for the first time. The storyline is by the numbers in which Shrek is tricked by Rumpelstiltskin into being an Ogre that people are terrified of again, but in return Shrek is transported to an alternate world where Rumpelstiltskin rules the land. Dreamworks stick with all the old characters, but nothing feels fresh here. This is highlighted by Rumpelstiltskin himself who is a cracking character but is sidelined by the regulars. This is a shame as Donkey et al fail to raise many laughs and many gags are recycled from previous films. In addition, where have all the wry homage’s and references to popular culture gone? If you’re a fan of the series you’ll get more out of this than most, but Shrek, bless ‘im, has had his time now and Dreamworks need to get back to the drawing board ASAP as Pixar have the upper hand at the moment based on the studios most recent outings of old friends.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Still enjoyable for fans, but this is an average farewell to a series that has lost its lustre, whilst still earning the lucre. Rating: 5/10

The Concert

Just by chance The Concert happened to be the third French film I saw in a row and though Heartbreaker is the meat in the sandwich, there’s enough in The Concert to be enjoyed as a slice on its own. Although this has been officially released as a French film, it’s collaboration between a few European countries, with France and Russia being the main players. This is hardly surprising though as the storyline concerns the Bolshoi ballet playing at a concert in Paris. Or at least, that’s what Andreï Filipov (Aleksei Guskov) would have the French believe. Filipov, a former conductor, is a cleaner at the Bolshoi Theatre, who fixes it so that his former orchestra plays in the Bolshoi’s place instead. Obviously you have to suspend disbelief somewhat for that premise, but director Radu Mihaileanu has a trick up his sleeve as he interweaves that story with Filipov’s relationship with expert violinist Anne-Marie Jacquet (Melanie Laurent). It’s a subtle blend of broad comedy and drama. I say broad comedy, as this film has some very dodgy national stereotyping. Even if it is a Franco-Russian alliance taking the mickey out of their own, it still feels a bit 1970’s sitcom at times. This film is all about the ending though when Filipov’s relationship with Jacquet is explained (albeit, somewhat unclearly) and Filipov’s orchestra perform. Though I can’t recall now how long they play for, the performance of the Violin Concerto in D major, Op 35 by Tchaikovsky is lengthy and utterly enthralling, giving the film one of the best feel good endings I can recall in a long time. If you’re not punching the air at the end you’ll at least be walking into the evening with a spring in step and a smile on your face.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A bit slow at times, but its simple charm will eventually win you over before its mesmerising finish. Rating: 7/10

Heartbreaker

What an unexpected gem this is. Knowing nothing before I went in, as I like to do, from my brief glance at the poster I was expecting a run of the mill romance. And a dull one at that from the trailer I had also seen. However, and this is what makes cinema so great, the best films just come out of nowhere. Heartbreaker tells the story of Alex (Romain Duris) the (glamorous) face of a small and secretive business that specialises in splitting up couples by showing the woman what might have been, though not by means of getting her into bed. Things go awry for Alex though when, due to rising debts, he accepts a seemingly impossible assignment to woo Juliette (Vanessa Paradis) before she weds Jonathan (Andrew Lincoln). Three problems though. One: The couple are in love and seemingly without problems, so this job goes against Alex’s beliefs. Two: Juliette initially ignores him. Three: Well, you can guess that anyway, surely? The best thing about this film is that everyone seems to be having a blast. A lot of kudos should go to first time director Pascal Chaumeil for this as he realises there’s no point playing anything straight here and just goes for broke laughs wise utilising visual gags, slapstick and one-liners (though some may find certain parts a little crude). Even Duris’ character is a wink to the audience because, despite his job as well, a heartbreaker, he goes from looking impossibly handsome to gormlessly dull in some scenes. The tricks of the trade that Alex uses in order to complete his tasks raise many titters and a scene where he comes to the aid of a car-jacked Juliette is a laugh out loud moment encapsulated not by dialogue, but by a tilted tracking shot by Chaumeil (his advertising background coming to the fore). The com definitely outweighs the rom in this one, but this is probably for the best as Paradis is somewhat bland throughout. The script also throws up a few unexpected turns including a small little twist at the end. On the negative side you may find the morals a bit dodgy and some back up characters fail to tickle the funny bone. Overall though this looks great, Duris is excellent (the running gag about him crying worth the price of admission alone) and it’s very very funny.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
More rom-COM then ROM-com, this is still charming enough to get away with its central premise due to a quotient of high laughter and it’s a film that both males and females can enjoy equally. Rating: 8/10.

Leaving

Catherine Corsini's Leaving begins with a bang. That being a shotgun fired by Kristin Scott Thomas in a plush home in the dead of night. However, we only hear said gunshot. Did she shoot someone? Something? Herself? To find out we then go back in time and pick up the story of Suzanne (Scott Thomas), a housewife in the south of France, who is on the verge of returning to work as a physiotherapist, only to begin an affair with a handyman (Ivan) which sets off a chain of events leading to the bullet firing ending/beginning. Despite this being a three hander it's Scott Thomas who hauls us through the emotional wringer with her performance as we see everything from her point of view. Interestingly, despite Suzanne's husband (played with authority by the ever reliable Yvan Attal) being a bit neglectful, there isn't much sympathy we actually give her for having an affair. However, as things start to go wrong for her and Ivan (admittedly via some contrived plotting), with their jobs not working out and her husband withholding his money from her, Scott Thomas' performance is so good she makes you feel sorry for. A scene where she desperately sells her watch for money at a petrol station is tragic. Corsini gets great mileage from Scott Thomas and a number of scenes in the film feel real and certainly believable due to the situations all three main characters find themselves in. However, Corsini doesn't move the story along at a quick enough pace. Fair enough if this was a two part TV series but not whilst you're sitting there thinking about the hard earned you've just spent. So, sex, drama, slow story, well acted. Hmm, did I mention this was a French film?


The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Worth watching for Scott Thomas alone, which just about makes up for Corsini's bland direction. Rating: 6/10.

Inception

You don’t get too many arguments, especially not from me, when Alfred Hitchcock is described as the world’s greatest director. By default, this also makes him the greatest British director of all time. In fifty years time though will Christopher Nolan have emerged as the new king deserving of said epitaph? A near flawless back catalogue has seen Nolan (rightly) decorated with praise left, right and centre since his early short films. Now comes the juggernaut that is Inception. Firstly, I should say that I’m reviewing this film having seen it twice. Not to “get” it mind you. The second time was an IMAX experience. However, it does make reviewing this film interesting as, much like Memento, you may get your head around it more second time round. For Inception though, whilst a second viewing means it can be enjoyed on a more comprehensive level, whether or not the film improves on a further viewing is open to debate. In terms of the complex plot we have Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) who, along with his team, enter the subconscious minds of sleeping targets and extract secretive information. However, after trying the trick on businessman Saito (Ken Watanabe) he recruits them to attempt “inception” on a business rival of his. Inception being planting an idea in the subconscious instead of stealing one. Where it goes from here is impossible to explain, but it involves going into deeper sublevels of the subconscious, i.e. dreams within dreams. So, it’s bonkers right? Indeed. Is it any good though? Firstly, Nolan’s got himself a killer cast for this. Everyone pulls their weight, especially Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Tom Hardy as members of DiCaprio’s crew. A shout out as well to Nolan fave Cillian Murphy as the businessman on who the inception is being attempted. The film falls mainly on DiCaprio’s shoulders though and he puts in a strong performance showing Cobb as a focused and driven individual, but one who has a permanent nagging doubt about it all at the back of his mind. In terms of Nolan’s direction this is as tight as you’d expect and the final sequence where the inception is attempted is expertly constructed as Nolan cross cuts backwards and forwards between characters in different levels of the subconscious all edited down to the exact final second to the conclusion of Cobb and Co’s mission. It’s a masterful moment. Throw in a pumping soundtrack from Hans Zimmer, and some fantastic effects, and you’ll feel that Nolan has triumphed again. And yet…..this isn’t Nolan’s best film, not by quite a bit. Though the sleight of hand is good, it lacks, apart from the final scene, the gut punch finale of The Prestige, it’s certainly not as entertaining as either of his Batman films and Memento gives a better example of a confusing film that can be unravelled into something coherent. That last point is going to be the sticking point for a lot of people. Is this just too smart for its own good? There’s certainly no right answer as to what conclusion you might draw from what you’ve just spent 150 minutes watching and some people might find that a con. If you’ve seen Last Year at Marienbad (which Nolan claims he hadn’t before he wrote this…really, Chris?) you’ll know where I’m coming from. Interestingly this is Nolan’s first completely original work since Following and by calling the main character Cobb, Nolan veterans may think they have the answer to all they have seen before them. My advice, and this includes the much talked about and cracking final scene, take from Inception what you want and leave it at that. It took Nolan ten years to do this film and even he has said there isn’t a said answer as to what you’ve just seen. A great film no doubt, but even better from Nolan surely awaits.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Nolan’s masterpiece? Not yet. His most entertaining film so far? Nope. One of the best films of the year? Definitely. Rating: 8/10.

Toy Story 3

Pixar's latest has been churning up the box office both sides of the pond since it's release. Hardly a surprise you may think, but John Lasseter will be more than happy when you consider that Toy Story 3 is easily the weakest of the Toy Story trilogy and that Toy Story 3 almost feels like a backward step, especially of terms of the animation, since the spectacular Up. So, why it's still raking in the bucks and quids? Two reasons: One, it's a Pixar film and it's still great. Two, it's in the dreaded 3D format. From memory I believe that Toy Story 2 was originally mooted to be a straight to video / DVD effort, but when Pixar realised what a gem they were developing it was pushed up to a cinema release and the rest is history. If anything, Toy Story 3 feels like the film that could have been straight to DVD. However, there's profit to be had, and when you attach the 3D aspect to the respected cash cow that is the Toy Story series, you're going to be rolling in it. Cynical? No doubt, but can you argue against it? In terms of the film, we now have Andy preparing to leave to go to college and due to a mix-up the majority of the toys find themselves at a day-care centre. Their initial joy at being played with again soon turns to horror as the tots daily rampage of destruction leaves them licking their wounds and thinking of the better times with Andy. The themes of this film are of loss, moving on and growing up. Interestingly it appears to be a film where your emotions will differ depending on whether you are a parent or not. Whilst the feeling of loss is meant to be in respect of toys being abandoned, it appeared to me to be more of a reference to the relationship between Andy and his mother and younger sister. Pixar has been accused at times of some cheese, which appeared to have been put to bed with the emotional punch that was Up. I'm not sure they can claim the problem hasn't resurfaced here. However, whilst you can almost accuse this of being Pixar by numbers, what numbers they are. Fantastic animation, scenes of joy and horror (the surely nightmare inducing for kids toy baby has to be seen to be believed), a hilarious running joke concerning Buzz's factory settings and the usual climatic edge of the seat chase scene finale mean it's another triumph for Pixar, if not quite reaching the heights of previous efforts.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Depending on your age and child status your enjoyment of this may vary. However, you will be entertained regardless as Pixar just never seem to make a bad film. Rating: 7/10.

Predators

The prospect of yet another Predator film is hardly going to entice people to part with their hard-earned, unless of course, said new film is a bit of cracker. Sadly Predators (see what they did there?) isn’t that film. Despite being in the fairly capable hands of Nimród Antal, this is hamstrung from the start by a feeling of déjà vu, a dodgy script and some even more dodgy acting. Having said that, it doesn’t actually start off all that bad as an unconscious Adrian Brody awakens to find himself in free fall, before a parachute deploys and he finds himself in a jungle on an unnamed planet. He is soon joined by a number of predator snacks, sorry additional cast members, and before long Brody and co are fighting an unknown and unseen enemy. The main problem the audience will have with this is that we already know what the predators are all about. So whilst the characters may be at a loss as to what the creatures are, the audience is already will versed in predator folklore. Therefore, there isn’t much originality to get excited about. It seems that even script writer Robert Rodriguiez was aware of this as the homage’s to the first film are many (and eventually, tiresome). Some exposition is attempted with the introduction of Lawrence Fishburne’s but his scenes are truly bizarre and Fishburne’s hamming has to be seen to be believed. He is not alone though, as a character twist by one of the other humans at the end is so unbelievable it will only provoke incredulous laughter. The only good thing to say is that this must surely be the end of all this nonsense once and for all as the only feeling you’ll have after watching this is the urge to watch the original film again in order to cleanse you of sequel guilt.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A film that just didn’t need to get the green light in the first place. Make’s Predator 2 look like Citizen Kane. Rating: 3/10.

Eclipse

I’m having more difficulty finding the time to fit in the film reviews these days so hurrah that Eclipse is my next review. Hurrah in the fact I don’t need to spend too much time reviewing this. I finished my review of the previous Twilight film by saying “Is teenage pouting and men running around with their shirts off really a basis for a film? Adjust rating either way depending on your view of this statement”, and you can pretty much read the same for Eclipse. I also said that watching the previous film with devotees is akin to an audience participation movie. However, even the teens with Robert Pattison and Kirsten Stewart posters on their walls won’t mutter much through Eclipse. Aside from a few additional plot points we basically have a film which is 2 hours of a love triangle. Hardly thrilling stuff. It’s no exaggeration to say almost an hour could have been chopped off this film and you would have have had the same storyline intact still. On the plus side, there are a few darker moments than before and the film does again keeps the series sense of humour intact. However, with many scenes that don’t propel the plot onwards, you'll definitely be a believer that this is a saga alright.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Even if you’re a fan boy (or more likely fan girl) you’ll struggle to say this is a success. Unbelievers will have broken out the garlic a long while ago anyway. Rating: 4/10

Please Give

Writer / Director Nicole Holofcener’s Please Give begins with shots of numerous women’s breasts as they undertake mammograms. The reason being that one of the characters (Rebecca (Rebecca Hall)) works as a breast cancer radiology technician. It’s obviously not done in a sexual way, but it’s hardly a great way to start a film. I suppose you could say it’s a talking point, which might possibly had been the idea in the first place. The film itself is about Kate (Catherine Keener) and Alex (Oliver Platt), a couple who buy furniture from estate sales and the sell them at a profit at their furniture shop. They also live next door to the grandmother of Rebecca and Mary (Amanda Peet). The drama concerns a number of areas but it’s Keeners Kate that mostly resembles the lead role as she battles with her guilt concerning her job and struggles to maintain a bond with her husband and teenage daughter. There is a strong cast in this film but, with the exception of Rebecca, all the characters they play are pretty uninviting. This is problem for the film as do you really care about hypocrites, adulterers and narcissists? At least you can say the actors do their jobs well, as you really won’t like their characters. Script wise there really isn’t anything special going on here and Holofcener’s stale direction does little to bring it to life. Overall, this is a drama meant to make you think and reflect about your own life. To be fair it does do that at certain points. However, there’s a good chance it’ll also make you think about the money you've just wasted watching it.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Too shallow by far, but at least the acting stops it from being a complete disaster. Rating: 4/10.

The Collector

Sometime Saw screenwriter Marcus Dunstan moves up to directing duties with The Collector, a film with a heavy passing resemblance to that particular franchise. Unsurprisingly, the film suffers from the same faults as the recent crop of Saw films in that gore features prominently over story. This is actually a shame, as this had the potential to be a nasty little shocker, but all tension disappears fairly early on once the claret starts to flow. Things get off to a promising start though with a neat nervy opening and an effective visual and audio assaulting credit sequence. We then are introduced to one of the main characters of the story, Arkin (Josh Stewart), an ex-con who due to a convenient plot device decides to burgle a rich families secluded house whilst they are away. He gets a shock though when a shadowy figure known as The Collector also enters the house and Arkin soon finds himself in a literal house of pain. To say anymore would be to spoil the somewhat ludicrous plot, but if you’re a fan of torture traps designed to maim and kill (Head in a bear-trap? Yes please!) you’ll be in for a treat, so to speak. Unfortunately, the aforementioned plot is a major sticking point. Obviously you suspend disbelief as much as you can when you’re watching a film but this is so implausible due to the countless plot holes it just becomes frustrating. Someone like Alexandre Aja may have done something better with this. Instead we’re left with a film that is somewhat unfairly dumped into the torture porn category, and despite Stewart’s decent performance, it doesn’t do itself many favours all the way up until the annoying and predictable denouement.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
After a promising start, this sadly gets worse minute by minute. Things don’t bode well for the mooted sequel. Rating: 4/10.

Killers

They say film critics derive more pleasure from reviewing a bad film than a good film. I’m not sure I agree with that because not only do you have to sit through dross like Killers but then you have to waste further minutes of your life reviewing it. The fact that Killers was not screened for critics before its initial release is hardly a surprise. They knew they had a turkey on their hands and were obviously delaying the negative reviews for as long as possible. So, is it really that bad? For me, I just found it tired and clichéd. Where is the originality going in these types of films? Fans would say why fix a winning formula no doubt, but is this formula really a winner when it’s this unimaginative? Killers is a True Lies-ish tale of Spencer (Ashton Kutcher), a contract killer, who after having enough of that particular profession, packs it all in and settles down with non-risk taker Jen (Katherine Heigl), who is oblivious to his past. However, before long a number of Spencer’s old colleagues are after him due to a bounty on his head. So, thrills and laughs abound then? Not a bit of it and the chemistry between Kutcher and Heigl is less than zero. Heigl has just about avoided popping up in rubbish like this so far so we’ll give her the benefit of the doubt for the moment. I’m sure there is an audience for this film somewhere, but I’d assume they have AK posters on their walls.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Ashton Kutcher as a contract killer? At least there’s one laugh in the film then. Rating: 2/10

Whatever Works

Despite being one of the most well know people in North America, Larry David has had a minimal big screen presence. Hardly surprising though when you consider the acclaim and fortune he has amassed from both Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm over the years. However, David takes the leading role in Woody Allen’s latest film, Whatever Works, Allen’s return to his beloved New York after a number of years shooting in Europe. In the film David plays Boris Yellnikoff a misanthropic professor who believes himself to be more of a professor of life and gives his, usually negative, advice about everyone and everything to whoever is in earshot. This includes Melody (Evan Rachel Wood) a 21 year old runaway who appears on Boris’s doorstep. Reluctantly taking her in, the storyline that unfolds is then somewhat unbelievable, but at least it’s not predictable. Some critics have pointed out that David is merely playing Allen in the film. Well, duh! Allen’s been playing “himself” in films for years (or at least the accepted film version of himself) so it’s hardly a surprise that Yellnikoff bears a resemblance to Alvy Singer, Isacc et al. Allen has David break the fourth wall on a number of occasions during the film. Usually a risky exercise in films, but it compliments Boris’s perception of life well. He has to tell everyone his opinions, including somewhat riskily, even giving the cinema audience a dressing down at the start. The one major blocking point for this film is whether Boris can garner any sympathy with the audience at all. If you don’t care much for the main character you’re going to struggle. On this front the side characters in the film all get decent screen time and story arcs, which come at just the right times throughout the film as a nice break from Boris’s constant moaning. In fact some of Boris’s patronising of Melody becomes repetitive quite quickly and is scarcely credible towards the end of the film. The old gag concerning Allen is about people preferring to his “earlier funny films” and it’s interesting to note that Allen wrote some of this screenplay in the late 1970’s. Does that explain why a lot of one-liners find the mark? Whatever it is, though there’s no zingers here, there’s enough to get you laughing on a number of occasions, though the ending of the film does seem to contradict what Boris has been preaching for the previous 90mins.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
David is great. Rachel Wood is even better. This isn’t early Woody, but it’s definitely funny Woody. Rating: 7/10.

Brooklyn’s Finest

Brooklyn’s Finest is a three hander following an increasingly desperate for money cop (Ethan Hawke), a tired of life veteran cop on the verge of retirement (Richard Gere) and an undercover cop (Don Cheadle) who is starting to have difficulty in separating his real life from his covert role. The first thing you may think on reading the above is that there isn’t much originality character wise here, and you’d be right. It’s also stereotypes galore on the criminal front. However, all is not lost due to a combination of decent acting, fair direction and a smart screenplay. Director Antoine Fuqua has a surprisingly varied back catalogue in terms of genre, surprising only in the sense that when you hear Fuqua’s name you immediately think Training Day and not much else. Unsurprisingly though it’s this film to which Brooklyn’s Finest bares a strong resemblance, from it’s inclusion of Hawke to Fuqua’s use of blue and grey colouring. All three main parts are well acted, adding meat to the bones of their stock characters. However, how much you engage with them is another matter altogether. There aren’t many likable characters in this film and it’s heavy going at times in terms of subject matter and length. If you stay with it though, Michael C. Martin’s screenplay is a twisty little number and Fuqua does well to evenly balance all three storylines in terms of dramatic impact, if not screen time. This includes a smart scene towards the end where all three storylines briefly meet though the main characters are all oblivious of each other. Overall, this is a firm if not overly memorable entry into this type of genre, but the nagging feeling exists that if Fuqua had cropped a few scenes this would have been a much tighter package indeed.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This is pretty much what you would expect from a Fuqua film, hit and miss but strong acting throughout. Rating: 7/10.

Wild Target

I usually try and avoid trailers for want of spoilers, but after seeing the trailer for Wild Target I was looking forward to seeing it as it came across as a potential little gem. Well, all I can say is well done to the editor of the trailer cos you had me fooled pal. It obviously strives to be an A Fish Called Wanda clone but this effort is severely lacking the sharpness of that screen play and the film has an overall cheap look and feel to it. In the film Bill Nighy stars as Victor, a ruthless hitman who finds himself drawn to his latest target, a con woman called Rose (Emily Blunt). After sparing her life, then saving her life (as you do), they find themselves on the run from Rose’s last mark, played by Rupert Everett, and his cronies. The introduction of Rupert Grint as a possible apprentice is pointless and superfluous to the main strand of the storyline, that of the growing relationship between Victor and Rose. In terms of that, loves does move in mysterious ways, but their blossoming romance never convinces, not helped by the age gap. Martin Freeman also pops up as a rival assassin (Dixon) and though it’s a paper thin part Freeman does his best to portray him as ruthless and sadistic. However, the tone of the film is is uneven throughout and some scenes of comic violence against people just come across as plain cruel. Throw in an awful soundtrack and lacklustre directing from the usually safe if not spectacular Jonathan Lynn and you have a film on which even Victor himself would perform a mercy killing.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Off Target, more like. Rating: 3/10

Letters To Juliet

Letters to Juliet director Gary Winick also directed Bride Wars. If you’re still reading at this point, well done you. You can’t be blamed though for at least approaching Winick’s latest film with some caution following the abomination to cinema that was Bride Wars. Happily enough that film soon becomes a distant memory as Winick deftly tells us the story of Sophie (Amanda Seyfried), who on a pre-honeymoon holiday to Verona, discovers the house where Juliet Capulet was inferred to have lived and the letters that numerous people leave daily at “Juliet’s wall” telling her about their love lives, good or bad. I won’t say too much else but Sophie soon becomes involved in the collection of these letters leading to a meeting with stuffy Englishman Charlie (Chris Egan) and his grandmother (Vanessa Redgrave). With Sophie’s chef fiancé (played with delight by Gael Garcia Bernal) more interested in investigating Italian food and drink, she finds herself spending more time with Charlie, despite them not getting on. If you can’t work out what happens next, this must be the first film of this kind you’ve ever seen. However, despite the standard formula it all plays out OK, as the performances are good, there’s a fair few laughs sprinkled about and the dramatic scenes resonate. Make no mistake though, this is utter fluff and there are some minus points. The stereotypes of nationalities is pretty teeth grinding, especially Charlie’s first scene in which he bounds in speaking with a clipped English accent not heard since the Movietone News reels of the 1930’s. It’s utterly embarrassing. In addition, the fact that Sophie working as a fact checker for the New York magazine, some of the most clued up and feared people in the publishing world, hasn’t even heard of the famous Juliet Letter phenomenon in Verona is somewhat lacking in credibility. Overall, if this isn’t you cup of tea (or glass of wine in this instance) you won’t touch this with a barge pole to start with, but if you’re a fan this ticks all the right boxes for this kind of genre.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Light as they come, but some good performance’s and more than one belly laugh make for a decent night out. Rating: 7/10.

The Brothers Bloom

Rian Johnson’s much anticipated follow up to his excellent Brick calling card has finally arrived in the cinema. So has it been worth the lengthy wait? The Brothers Bloom is actually a tricky film to review as it’s storyline of con artists and cons means it’s difficult to say too much without giving the game away. This is somewhat ironic as at times during the film you may actually be wanting someone to whisper in your ear just what is happening at certain points. Johnson is a talent no doubt, and he gets decent performances from Mark Ruffalo and Adrian Brody who convince as the eponymous brothers. This is crucial as though the screenplay is written for stings, the overriding story is that of the relationship between the two brothers. However, despite Ruffalo and Brody’s efforts the film suffers as, even though their family bond is well portrayed, their actual characters fail to engage the viewer. Help arrives on this front with the introduction of Penelope (played by Rachel Weisz), but her part is formulaic of con films and despite her strong performance it still comes across as a plot device. This could have been a further cult classic of Johnson’s but the screenplay twists in too many directions leading to frustration rather than retrospective admiration. The curse of the difficult second “album” strikes again.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
You won’t feel like you’ve been conned per se, but you will feel disappointed. Rating: 5/10.