Cowboys & Aliens

For a long time now film buffs have known about the legendary “pitches” that occur in the most expensive offices in Hollywood. Is Cowboys & Aliens the greatest ever? Not only is it a pitch, but it is also the name of the film. Or is it something that you would normally more likely see on those garish B-movies that litter up the Cote d'Azur during the Cannes film festival? Well the Dreamworks, Universal and Paramount (gulp) Studios all thought the former and a deep breath please for the talent involved in this film: Craig, Ford, Spielberg, Rockwell, Carradine, Favreau, Grazer, Orci and Rosenberg. Have too many cooks (especially on the screenwriting front) spoilt the broth though? In the film we are in 1873 and we follow Jake (Daniel Craig) a cowboy who awakes out in the scrub with a strange metallic device on his wrist and no memory of how it or he got there. Before long he’s having run-ins with the locals and law of a small town, but that is all small beer when Alien spacecraft arrive out of the blue and start picking off the locals one by one. This should be non-stop fun, but even with the dark undertones, this is really a kids film dressed as something a bit more. Despite the premise, the screenplay isn’t really any great shakes and none of the actors have to get out of first gear. Craig is usually pretty good, but he has zero charisma here (though that’s probably a by-effect of his character having to act confused for the majority of the film) and Harrison Ford is scarcely belivable as an evil cattle baron. Olivia Wilde appears as a token female character, but seems out of her depth and she also has the misfortune of being a plot twist you can see a mile off. What’s most disappointing of all though are the special effects, especially considering the money involved. The aliens look pretty awful during any daytime scenes, which may partly explain the reason why a large portion of the film is set at night or in dimly lit areas. Despite the negatives director Jon Favreau still does a decent job, moving the story along at speed and trying his best to steer between the plot hole filled screenplay. Hats off to him as well for resisting calls for it to be converted to 3D. All in all this is a fun but standard ride, which is a huge shame when you consider the names involved and what might have been.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

You’ll be entertained, but disappointed as the film never quite works out what it wants to be. Rating: 6/10.

One Day

One Day is the film of David Nicholls' best selling novel, telling the story of friends Emma (Anne Hathaway) and Dexter (Jim Sturgess) from their graduation day in the late 1980’s and then moving forward a year at a time on the same date as we discover where they are in their respective relationships and lives. It's actually a neat trick and the attention to detail re fashions and music of each passing year is nicely portrayed, including Dexter's immersion of the lads culture of late 90's Britain. Though, why the need for a superimposed BT Tower at the start of the film (which sticks out like a sore thumb) is anyone's guess. You don’t need to be a genius to work out that this film is actually about whether Emma and Dexter get together. The key is whether you care or not. I think the audience will be split. On the one hand, though it’s basically story telling by numbers, it does work, and only the stoniest of hearts will not be slightly cracked come the end. On the other hand you can say this is a romance between, in their differing ways, two pretty unlikable characters as Emma is too wet and Dexter is basically an arse. Hathaway's got some serious stick for her Yorkshire accent, but it's virtually missing for most of the film, only popping up every now and then so it's not really a distraction. The problems with the film can either be laid at the feet of Nicholl’s himself (as screenwriter) for failing to transpose page to screen successfully or are Hathaway and Sturgess just mis-cast? (US audiences clearly weren’t interested). Director Lone Scherfig's pedestrian direction doesn't help, nor does the dodgy make-up on Sturgess. Guys, giving him a few grey hairs does not a 40-year-old make. Having said all that, overall, despite there being quite a lot of problems with the film, if you like this kind of thing you should be OK. Whether the rest of the audience is prepared to give the benefit of the doubt, is another matter entirely.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

Well loved book, average film. Now, where have we heard that before? Rating: 6/10.

Never Let Me Go

Ah, our old film friend, dystopia. Kazuo Ishiguro’s well received novel from 2005, Never Let Me Go, has now been made into a film by Mark Romanek. It follows three children, Ruth (Keira Knightley), Kathy (Carey Mulligan) and Tommy (Andrew Garfield), and their upbringing from boarding school to becoming young adults. They don’t get much further than that though as we are in an alternate universe here where certain children are “bred” so they can donate their organs to severely ill people. I mentioned dystopia at the start, but Romanek’s film doesn’t give any hints visually that we’re in a different time and place than now. England basically just looks like England, albeit a bit greyer (insert gag here). If the idea was to highlight the real horror of the situation in such a low key way, (i.e. the world is just carrying on as normal, but hey, we’ve now got human harvesting) it doesn’t really work. Though I haven’t read the book, it’s been mentioned that the main problem with the film is that it has little emotional impact compared to the source material. It’s obviously highly disturbing if you stop and think about the premise of the film, but the message doesn’t hit home hard enough on screen and what you basically have is a fair chunk of the film being a story of moody teenagers. Romanek himself has said he filmed this as a love story, but when the protagonists are all wetter than a fishes wet bits it’s all a bit dull. In terms of the acting Mulligan is the best, but there’s a sentiment vacuum to the characters and it’s hard to actually care too much about them or their unpleasant fate. The film has fared badly at the box office and there’s been numerous reasons put forward as to why. For me it’s fairly simple. Despite the plot, this is just too slow and staid to peek the average viewer’s interest. Another case of the unfilmable novel?

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

You’ll be unsurprised to hear that this isn’t a barrel of laughs, but that shouldn’t be a barrier to whether a film is good or not. Unfortunately, the storyline hasn’t translated all that well onto the screen. Rating: 5/10.

Hall Pass

There’s Something About Mary will always be the high point for the Farrelly brothers and though it’s not a surprise they’ve never topped such a superb film, what is surprising is just how lame all their other output has been since then. Hall Pass does not address the decline. The story of two friends played by Owen Wilson and Jason Sudeikis, who receive a “hall pass” from their wives basically giving them permission to have an affair, is as unfunny as it is predictable. Predictable as in their characters may be a bit pervy, but they’re basically nice guys so we already know that even if the opportunity arrives on a plate for them (which it does) they won’t follow it through anyway (which they don’t). Their characters final realisation that it’s their wives that make them complete is as patronising as it is foreseeable. OK, now throw rotten fruit at me as you point out that the idea behind the film is to have a laugh at their efforts to get laid, predictability be damned. Now I dodge said rotten fruit and say “Fair enough”, but there’s a problem though. It’s just not funny enough. Actually, it appears to be more that the Farrelly’s couldn’t decide if this should be full gross out or not and get caught in an awkward no-man’s land. There are a few decent one-liners, but some scenes are way too over the top, including the now infamous “sneeze” scene, which attempts to top the “hair gel” scene from Mary but is just plain horrible. A running gag regarding Kathy Griffin is also going to be lost to most people outside of North America. To be fair to the Farrelly’s the plot does take an interesting detour in which we also follow the wives of Wilson and Sudeikis (played by Jenna Fischer and Christina Applegate) and their own shenanigans. However, this isn’t explored thoroughly enough though and before long it’s back to the boys and more knob jokes. Overall, this is too much of a mess with a somewhat questionable attitude towards women. I have given it an extra mark though for the supremely silly credits sequence involving Stephen Merchant.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

If you like films where a bunch of losers wander around failing with women, well…. Rating: 4/10

Unknown

It’s amnesia time again, folks! In Unknown, Dr Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) and his wife (January Jones) take a trip to Berlin to attend a medical conference, but an accident befalls Harris who, after being unconscious for a few days, wakes up to discover that a different man appears to have taken over his identity and that even his wife has no idea who he is. As Harris’ memory begins to repair itself, and with help from Diane Kruger (playing the world’s most implausible taxi driver), he begins to unravel what’s going on, but, of course, that means he soon finds himself under threat from some shadowy forces. The innocent man on the run is the classic Hitchcock staple, though director Jaume Collet-Serra differs from the master by going down the route of having the audience find out the plot twist at the same time as the protagonist. This actually works quite well and the reveal is smart (if increasingly implausible as the film progresses). Collet-Serra has a back ground in music videos and TV commercials and he certainly knows how to convey an atmosphere, including the real star of the film, Berlin itself, which he shoots in muted metallic colours giving the rainy and snowy city a menacing look, though with a hint of beauty underneath. Fans of German films will also appreciate appearances by many well known faces, including Bruno Kanz and Sebastian Koch. Despite Collet-Serra’s frenetic background, he doesn’t have much experience of shooting action sequences and some of them in this film aren’t really up to scratch. However, to be fair to him he does pretty much get most other things right and helped by a good performance in the lead from Neeson this is a nice thriller which moves along at a decent pace.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

Quite smart this, though, ironically, not one to stay in the memory long after. Rating: 7/10

Submarine

Though American Pie was great, its sequels and subsequent imitators were basically inferior versions of what had gone before. There’s only so many times you can tell the story of randy teenage kids attempting to lose their virginity's. So it’s quite a surprise to find a fresh take on the whole issue in a low budget British production. Even more surprising when you consider that the writer / director is Richard Ayoade, of The IT Crowd fame. For Submarine, Ayoade adapts Joe Dunthorne’s novel, telling the story of 15 year old Oliver Tate (Craig Roberts) and his clumsy attempts to woo Jordana (Yasmin Paige), whilst simultaneously trying to save his parents (Sally Hawkins and Noah Taylor) rocky marriage. Having mentioned the American Pie analogy, I’m actually doing Submarine a bit of a disservice, as it isn’t all about Oliver getting his leg over, but more a overall study of those, at times awkward, coming of age moments. You’ll smile as you recall what it was once like to be that innocent. Unsurprisingly with Ayoade’s background, there are some touches of comic genius here, especially the moment when Oliver’s dad presents him with a “falling in love” mix tape, which features “Break Up” songs on the reverse side (see what I mean about innocence). Hawkins and Taylor are both good as the parents, whilst Paddy Considine as a new-age guru, complete with shocking mullet, proves once again what a chameleon of a actor he is. Most surprising of all is, for a debut feature, how assured Ayoade is behind the camera, moving the story line along and utilising some stunning cinematography in parts, framing certain scenes in such a manner that dialogue is hardly needed to tell us what is going on. Of course it can’t be all-perfect. Some people will find this a bit too quirky and though Roberts and Paige are great, some people may find their characters somewhat unlovable. What can’t be denied though is that this is a solid debut feature from Ayoade. Is this the calling card of a new British cinematic talent? On this evidence, let’s hope so.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

A gem of a film, destined for cult status. Rating: 8/10.

The Company Men

Though very different in style and tone The Company Men is a companion piece to Up In The Air in the fact it concerns people losing their jobs and the hardships this causes. There is one major difference though. Where as Jason Reitman's film centred on the middle and lower work force being made redundant this film is all about the high rollers being bought down a step. The story line follows three employees (Ben Affleck, Tommy Lee Jones and Chris Cooper) all earning a decent wage of various different levels at a company which begins a dreaded downsizing programme. The acting is fine and the sets (bland cookie cutter offices) are meant to give the impression that this could be happening anywhere. Despite the subject matter, and a poster blatantly ripped off from Glengarry Glen Ross, writer / director John Wells takes a low-key approach to the situations the characters find themselves in. Wells has a heavy US TV background and this is portrayed in his direction which is TV Movie Of The Week quality at best. The main problem with the film though is what is Wells trying to tell us? If it’s that high earners also feel the pinch when losing their jobs he doesn’t do a great job of eliciting sympathy from the audience. Earnings and spending are of course relative, but just what has Affleck spent all his money on to suddenly be virtually broke in a few weeks? What happened to his savings? It’s never fully explained. The film is also a study of the “Old School” family, in which the man works whilst the woman stays at home. However, though this gives Wells some leeway in the script to assess the characters self-worth as “men”, it also feels, in today’s world of many high-powered businesswomen, from a different time. Though there are many unanswered questions, Wells’ film is still a talking point for everyone. There, but for the grace of God, indeed.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

Not bad, but perfunctory at best. Rating: 6/10.

Rango

Perhaps it will be forgotten about pretty quickly, or become a pub quiz question for uberfilm geeks, but Rango is the first animated feature produced by Industrial Light & Magic. So already this looks promising even before you factor in director Gore Verbinski and a cast of heavy hitters on vocal duties. Do they all add up to a potent mixture though? In the film, Rango (Johnny Depp) is a chameleon who, following on from a car accident, finds himself in a lawless town full of various other creatures. I mentioned geeks at the start of this review and buffs will have a field day here as references to classic westerns come thick and fast, though the over riding storyline is based on Chinatown (without the incest, of course!). The look of the film is fantastic and some of the more frantic scenes are mesmerising in their attention to detail despite the mayhem going on. In addition there appears to have been real thought put into the various creatures on show and their own personalities. In respect of that, if you don’t know the voice cast before hand either you can have the usual fun trying to guess who’s voice is behind what character. The film has two major flaws though. Just what genre of film is it and who is it for? It’s marketed as a comedy, but it just isn’t very funny. It’s certainly dramatic in parts, but too many scenes turn into outright silliness. It’s too slow for kids and not attractive enough for adults. Having said all that it’s still an intriguing watch, but the fact that numerous lines and scenes were trimmed for the cinema release (in order to get a lower certificate) show that Verbinski and the studio were juxtaposed between bums on seats and the quality of their finished product. Shame.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

This is a decent enough film, but its unlikely to demand repeat viewing due to it being too broad for kids and not engaging enough for adults. Rating: 7/10.

Animal Kingdom

David Michôd’s Animal Kingdom is a tale of two gun shots. Both out of the blue, cinema seat jumping moments that book end the latest gritty drama from Australia. Not to give too much away, but the first has echoes of Psycho in terms of its plot twisting nature, whilst the second will give some of the audience a release of the pent up tension built up during the preceding couple of hours. Loosely based on a real life family from Melbourne, Michôd’s crime drama has echoes of The Departed, The Town and Goodfellas. However, this is a stand alone achievement from Michôd who doubles up as both screenwriter and director. His film tells the story of 17 year old Josh who, following the death of his mother, moves in with his grandmother (Jacki Weaver) and her three sons, and attempts to live a normal life with them despite the family’s criminality and a policeman’s (Guy Pearce) efforts to turn him away from a life of crime. The direction and screenplay are only average really, but the film triumphs thanks to its superb acting. Weaver, as the family matriarch, is the classic criminal mother. Turning a blind eye to her sons shocking lifestyle, whilst loving them with a barely disguised incestuous nature. A cliche her character may be, but Weaver is disturbingly believable as someone who probably has many a hit to her name, without ever getting her hands dirty. Though its Ben Mendelsohn, playing one of her sons, who is even more disconcerting. Playing a quietly talking psychopath Mendelsohn intimidates all around him, friend or family, and his dead eyed stare reveals a man who’s soul was lost a long time ago. His casual murder of an innocent character feels so run of the mill that it is one of the most disturbing film deaths in recent memory. The trump card the film has is that, despite the appearance of Pearce (though himself, excellent as always), the Australian actors (to North American and European audiences anyway) are unknowns and, like the best low budget horror films, if the hierarchy of the cast is unclear you can’t second guess which characters will be standing at the end. This also helps in terms of the authenticity of the film. There’s no crisps suits, sunglasses or smart ass dialogue here as contained in the aforementioned films at the top. These guys feel like real criminals. In terms of negatives Michôd’s direction is fairly static, though this does give the film an almost documentary feel to it, but it’s unclear if this is intentional or not. Also, some of the character’s reactions to what is going on around them is so under whelming it appears you are watching the rehearsal, as opposed to the main feature. Overall though, this is a welcome addition to the crime film canon and a timely reminder that a small budget is never a handicap to the quality of a film if attention is paid to the critical areas by which a film will stand or fall.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

A tough watch, but if the glamour of Hollywood crime is getting too much for you, this cold shower of a film is the perfect riposte, complete with some superb performances. Rating: 8/10.

I Am Number Four

I Am Number Four is a bit of a tricky title when it comes to pulling in an audience, though for the sake of Austin Powers style guffaws, at least it isn’t called I Am Number Two. So, just what is it about? Well, that’s also a bit tricky to explain as not only would I give away quite a few spoilers, it would also take too damn long to get to the bottom of the whole shebang….and even then there’s still numerous questions left unanswered. Anyway, to sum up as best possible, teenager John Smith (Alex Pettyfer) is an alien (albeit in human form) who, along with his guardian Henri (Timothy Olyphant), is currently hiding out on Earth from the invaders who destroyed his planet. Before long though, Smith’s extra-terrestrial powers begin to raise suspicions amongst the locals and there’s also the problem of his enemies still on his tail. Frankly, not a lot of this makes much sense, but director D J Caruso has form in this area where he can make entertaining films despite screenplays full of holes and more than one contrived co-incidence. This film is no different and Caruso also gets a decent performance out of Pettyfer, though he’s no doubt helped by Pettyfer’s usual acting style of minimal emotion and expression being a perfect match for an alien trying not to draw attention to itself. Olyphant is fine as well, but still frustrates in the fact he never quite appears to be a natural on film as opposed to his solid TV work. Despite the crazy storyline, this has the nice underlying feel of an old style teenage high school film what with young love blossoming, scrapes being gotten into (and out of) and bullies getting their comeuppance. On the downside some of the specials effects are dodgy to say the least and the final climatic battle scene underwhelms. Overall, despite being hamstrung by a lame opening and a lame ending, there is squashed in the middle an enjoyable little fantasy film which is entertaining as it is confusing.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

By no means perfect, but the perfect antidote to the Twilight films. Rating: 7/10.

No Strings Attached

The marketing for No Strings Attached bears an uncanny resemblance to that of Love and Other Drugs, in the fact we have two good looking young Hollywood stars getting their kit off and getting down to business. So, that’s the selling point covered then, but what about the rest of the film? The stars here are Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher, two people who bump into each other every few years or so who eventually begin a relationship based only on the beast with two backs. Anything more emotional isn’t allowed. I’ll now give you 10 seconds to work out the main plot points and the films conclusion. Easy, huh? Suffice to say, that really isn’t the point with these films and the target audience goes to see them anyway expecting the obvious to occur. Director Ivan Reitman is quoted as saying he made this film as he noticed the younger generation of today find it easy to have a sexual relationship as opposed to an emotional one. Whether you agree with that or not, it’s a shame that Reitman doesn’t really explore this opinion in the film. All we get is run of the mill direction, a stock plot and pick up the cheque performances from both Portman and Kutcher. The less said the better about Kevin Kline’s appearance as Kutcher’s randy Dad as well. As for those aforementioned juicy scenes, some people will get a cheap thrill but they seem out of place. Having said all that though, the films target demographic is women between 17 and 24 years old and according to reports the overall audience split has been 70% women, 30% men. I can’t really comment on whether this is a women’s film or not, but I expect any women (or men) who do see this, and are keen fans of such films, to be mildly entertained.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

A few laughs, but only the target audience need apply. Rating: 5/10.

The Rite

Though of varying quality, films about demotic possession have been plastered across the cinema screens in recent years. The reason, despite the dubious entertainment value of some of them, is that audiences love to watch them. So the latest entry, The Rite, will probably make some decent coin, which would be a fair return for a film that whilst no great shakes, is still a half decent watch. The storyline concerns sceptical trainee priest Michael (Colin O’Donoghue) whose own faith has been tested by personal events and is sent to witness an exorcist (Anthony Hopkins) at work. However, during an exorcism of a teenage girl, odd happenings begin to occur that cannot be fully explained…or can they? Basically, this is run of the mill stuff (you’ll be unsurprised to hear the film has the same producers as the similarly themed The Exorcism Of Emily Rose), but a few nice scenes of ambiguity give the film a touch of eeriness. Swedish director Mikael Hafstrom has a chequered history when it comes to horror films, but he appears to have learnt his lessons from previous outings in that this is a much toned down film compared to previous efforts. In reality, despite the advertising and trailer, this shouldn’t really be classified as a horror film at all as it’s more a general study of one man’s faith and the religious order he belongs too. Hafstrom also attended real exorcisms as part of his preparation for the film, so at least he can’t be accused of not doing his homework. It’s a shame then that it all unravels so quickly at the end as any subtlety goes out the door and Hopkins, great up until that point, starts hamming it up to an alarming effect. I suspect some studio interference here, and it’s a pity as this could have been the thinking person’s “horror” film. What we have instead is, ironically much like the possessed teenager girl, something that doesn’t appear to quite know what it wants to be…..

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict

You’ve seen it all before, but this is still an entertaining, if instantly forgettable, Friday night special. Rating: 6/10