Date Night

Two of Americas premier comedians in Steve Carell and Tina Fey team up for Date Night, a film that is slight in running time, slight in script, but crucially, very funny. Despite being a loving couple, the Fosters (Carell and Fey) feel the staleness of marriage coming in. Therefore, during a date night (natch) at a fancy restaurant, and on having trouble getting a reservation, on the spur of the moment they steal someone else’s table. This leads to a chain reaction of outrageous events coming across like a mixture of episodes of Seinfeld and Frasier. The plot itself utilises the classic 21st century MacGuffin of a computer memory stick in order to dump Carell and Fey in ever more farcical situations. The screenplay is basically just an extended series of skits, but you’ll be laughing too much to care about the ludicrousness of it all. Though they bounce off a number of other characters throughout the film, this is the Carell and Fey show all the way, both showing their comic timing and their gifts as physical comedians as well. Director Shawn Levy moves the film along at breakneck speed so any gags that fall flat are quickly forgotten about. He also shoots one of the more original car chases for quite a while. This will probably remind you a bit of After Hours, but, despite the subject matter of guns and attempted murder, this is a might lighter affair. On the down side you might find this just too ludicrous and non-sequential to be coherent. In addition, the short running time means that other actors (William Fichtner, Mark Wahlberg, Ray Liotta) are rail-roaded in favour of the Carell/Fey juggernaut. Mark Ruffalo even appears in a bizarre one minute cameo (why?), though James Franco fares better in a longer scene. Overall then, this will probably leave the memory pretty quickly, but for the hour and a bit you spend watching it you’ll be chuckling at regular intervals.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Some faults, no doubt, but this is a comedy film with many laughs. The point, no? Rating: 7/10

Dear John

The last film released that was directed by Lasse Hallström was the emotionally draining Hachi. Therefore, you’d think his next film, Dear John, which deals with found love, lost love, family ties etc would be a shoo-in for watery eyes. How wrong you’d be though. This film is an adaptation of the Nicholas Sparks novel, which, if you’re aware of his output, you’ll already have a fair impression of what the basics of the film will be about. In Dear John we have Channing Tatum starring as John Tyree, a soldier who, whilst on leave, falls for Savannah Curtis (played by Amanda Seyfried). Can the relationship last though? The biggest problem is that we, frankly, don’t care. Tatum is again cast as the caring beefcake, but has little charisma, whilst Seyfried is somewhat mis-cast. The fact there is zero chemistry between them means you’ll be hard pressed to donate much emotion to either. The one place the film does succeed is showing Tyree’s relationship with his mentally ill father (played by the ever excellent Richard Jenkins). In fact a whole film based on their relationship would have been more of a success as opposed to having it mixed in with some mawkishness of the very worst kind.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
I think even the target audience might struggle with this one. Rating: 4/10.

The Ghost

The European version of this film has a bizarre start. Straight from the certificate screen there is a sudden and messy jump to the title screen followed by an even more abrupt cut to Ewan McGregor…and then away we go. Huh? What happened there then? Basically, the US version is called The Ghost Writer, and therefore changes were needed for this version. However, this untidy start is a good metaphor for the film as a whole as whilst Roman Polanski does a fair job of adapting Robert Harris’ source novel, the screenplay has far too may loose ends and coincidences for this to be anything more than an average effort. However, if you like slow plotting, conspiracies and the occasional twist, then this could be the film for you. The Ghost of the title is played by McGregor, a ghost writer, who is employed by a former British prime minister to help write his memoirs. It’s well documented that Harris’ novel is an thinly veiled analogue of Tony Blair. However, its best just to engage this film on it’s own two feet. Unsurprisingly, as McGregor delves deeper into the secrets of the PM’s past, he finds himself getting into deep water. Did the same type of investigation lead to the mysterious death of the previous ghost writer? McGregor does a good job, first playing the ghost in a laid back and jokey manner, as if he can’t believe the situation he’s found himself in the first place, before giving way to suspicion and fear, due to the subsequent dirt he digs up. The rest of the cast don’t fare quite so well. Pierce Brosnan as the PM doesn’t have enough screen time (though a gag involving the Blair smile is memorable), whilst a number of other characters suffer from being mere stereotypes (though Tom Wilkinson American accent spotters are indulged yet again). Direction wise the film has a cold feel to it, but I expect (or at least hope) that was Polanski’s aim in the first place. If you can cope with the slow tempo and a few unbelievable moments (McGregor bedding the PM’s wife!), you should just about be satisfied with this, but its frustrating to think what might have been.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This slow paced thriller is passable, but the nagging doubt remains this could have been a whole lot more. Rating: 6/10.

How To Train Your Dragon

The biggest difference I feel between Pixar films and Dreamworks films is that Dreamworks’ never quite gets the balance right between entertaining adults and entertaining children. How To Train Your Dragon is no exception to this rule, though co-directors Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders do attempt to distance the film from the whimsy of the source material. The first thing to say is that the film does look amazing. When you consider that ubercinematographer Roger Deakins was on board for this, then this won’t be too much of a surprise. In the film itself, a mythical Viking village comes under constant attack from dragons. The villagers fight back, including Hiccup, a young Viking trying to impress his father that he is strong and fearsome enough to fight the cause as well. Despite some setbacks, Hiccup eventually, and secretly, captures a Night Fury, the most feared dragon of them all. However, Hiccup soon realises that maybe their fire-breathing foes aren’t too dangerous after all. The dragons in the film have had a lot of thought put into them, and with them being all shapes and sizes, there is some nice originality here. Again, the 3-D is an irrelevance for a film such as this, which is still a success despite it, not because of it. However, it would be remiss not to mention that this is one of the better 3-D efforts of the year. The major problem with the film is that the storyline is too thin. It is also lacking in decent laughs. And whilst the final battle also feels somewhat anti-climatic at least the producers had the courage to give Hiccup an unusual coda come the end of the film.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Not really this years surprise hit like Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs was last year, but this should still provide entertainment for kids and does have a few original ideas on some old myths. Rating: 6/10.