Search Results

Directed by Jake Schreier Starring: Nat Wolff, Cara Delevingne, Austin Abrams, Justice Smith, Halston Sage ★★★ Review by Keiran Freemantle Author John Green has had great success with his novels targeted to a young adult audience. The adaptation of The Fault in Our Stars (2014) was a huge critical and commercial success and the same production and writing team were hoping to repeat that with the comedy-drama Paper Towns. Quentin AKA “Q” (Nat Wolff) and Margo (Cara Delevigne) are neighbours and childhood friends who grew apart as they got older. Q is a nerdy kid who wants to become a doctor and Margo is a popular yet rebellious girl who keeps disappearing. But on the eve of their senior prom Margo asks Q for his help with her revenge schemes against her cheating boyfriend and his cohorts. By this Margo gets the boy to find his lighter, freer side. After that night Margo disappears again and leaves clues for Q regarding her whereabouts. Q with his friends, Rader, the nerdy black kid (Justice Smith), Ben (Austin Abrams), basically Jay from The Inbetweeners without the vulgarity and Margo's best friend Lacey (Halston Sage) set out to find the clues and piece together the mystery that Margo has left behind. Paper Towns is a film that is made for its core demographic of teenage girls, a coming-of-age tale that aims to show the depths of teenagers beyond their sub-groups. It plays out like an updated version of a John Hughes film as teenagers from different walks of life come together to solve the mystery that is Margo as their time in high school comes to an end, a period of hell in form for most people. Despite characters being in certain cliques, Green and the screenwriters aim to show there is more them than what is on the surface suggests, whether it is taking Q out of his comfort zone, showing Margo to be an arty hipster beyond her popular girl image and Lacey states she is a smart girl beyond her beautiful image. The humour in Paper Towns is of a light-hearted nature resulting in small chuckles, but no major laughs. It suffers the same problem that affects a lot of comedy-dramas, it is not funny or dramatic enough, aiming for an unsatisfying middle ground. The most humorous parts of the film come from the dialogue as characters having exchanges with each other. The relationship between the three male friends was very realistic, they took the mick out of each other in form, like Rader's relationship with his girlfriend Angela (Jaz Sinclair), Radar's parents’ embarrassing collection and Ben saying he fancies Q's mother (Cara Buono) - again being like the lads from The Inbetweeners and this does makes Ben grating at times. Woolf, Smith and Abrams had excellent chemistry together and their interactions seem very natural and were fun to watch. They felt like they really have been friends for years. The film is about the friendship between the boys, the end of chapter in their lives and their parting of ways as much as it is a story about finding Margo and having characters taking risks. Other jokes involve an African-American character accidentally wearing an inappropriate t-shirt, thought recent events in South Carolina make it a much darker joke then it was intended to be and on the road trip the film lifts another joke from The Inbetweeners is one from the episode "A Night Out in London". Some jokes do fall flat and feel out of place, like a moment at a party that was awkward then funny. Delevigne as Margo has some witty lines being a quirky girl with a capital Q when she appears in the first act of the film (she writes notes with capital and small letters anywhere in a word) and her pranks raise a smile. Margo was Delevinge's first major film role and she gives a solid performance having a charm despite well being a selfish young woman who plays games, only cares for living for the moment and is overly idolised by Q. We are set to see her again as Enchantress in Suicide Squad. Paper Towns is Jake Schreier’s follow-up film from his directional debut Robot & Frank and he brings a certain flash to the proceedings. His cinematographer David Lanzenberg gives Paper Towns a bright, sun-drenched look, particularly for scenes with Margo adding to her seemingly being a dream girl. There is also a jovial soundtrack to adds to the mood of the film. Paper Towns is a soft comedy-drama that has excellent cast and will appeal to teenage girls and fans of Green's work but beyond that the film is average. Watch the Paper Towns trailer below... #PaperTowns #KieranFreemantle #UKFilmReview #TheatricalReleases

Directed by Judd Apatow Starring Amy Schumer & Bill Hader Review by Monica Jowett Judd Apatow’s fifth time directing, written by Amy Schumer, Trainwreck is a delightfully romantic sex comedy. Set in a summery New York that makes great use of the city, forming jokes over the nuisance of the Staten Island ferry and the Subway, with references to other New York-set films that place you on familiar ground. For first time screenwriting, Schumer shows that her unabashed feminist comedy style works well on screen. The simple plot of boy meets girl rom com formula is mixed up and changed, working well under Apatow’s comedy genius directing. What was thoroughly enjoyable was how certain scenes would go off on a tangent, with no effect to the overall storyline. One example, Aaron (Bill Hader) is having lunch with LeBron James (as himself) and arguing over paying the bill. Aaron is annoyed once again to find James has left his wallet in his car. The cute bickering between friends builds the laughter. Schumer came as surprise to be a brilliant leading lady. She proves how great it is to have a comedienne in a leading romantic role. She is actually likeable as the boozy, pot smoking woman who has strings of one night stands and stumbles around in stilettoes and short skirts. Her comical anecdotes are hilarious and quotable (tampon as bloody as the Red Wedding). However, her acting ability suggests she doesn’t need to always rely on the comedy. Her relationship with her sister (Brie Larson) and father (Colin Quinn) is heart-warming and shows a softer side to the brazen character. Supporting cast is phenomenal. Bill Hader – not usually the first go-to for a romantic lead but he is adorable and the perfect straight man opposite Schumer, convincingly so. From their first meeting on screen as sports doctor and sports hater journalist it is clear they should be together, and even better that they suit one another. Then there is Tilda Swinton who is unrecognisable as the bitchy English boss of Amy’s and a joy to see in a mainstream comedy like this. There is also Amy’s other eccentric co-workers who match the crass humour of Schumer and the ridiculous magazine they work for. Jon Cena pops up as Amy’s casual boyfriend, who’s stereotyped as the gym guy but clearly in the closet and Mike Birbiglia as the boring brother in law. Then similar to other Apatow films is the heap of cameos, from sports stars to famous actors and acclaimed sports commentators. These actors show brilliant comedy chops, even when up against SNL alumni like Bill Hader (LeBron James particularly) but it feels as though Apatow has stuffed them in to see what gains the laughs and what does not. What starts off as a new take on a romantic sex comedy soon falls into a cliché of rom coms, as Amy falls out with friends and family and has to change her ways to get back on her feet. She stops the drinking, proves she is a great journalist and makes a big gesture to prove how good she is for Hader’s hard working doctor. Schumer’s screenwriting debut is a surprising comedy hit for the summer. Schumer herself is a hit with her unpredictable personality and rapid comic delivery, there is a lot more to come from Amy Schumer. Watch the Trainwreck trailer below... #Trainwreck #TheatricalReleases #MonicaJowett #JuddApatow #AmySchumer #UKFilmReview

Directed by John Watson & Richard Miller Starring Alex Lochrie, Sam Foster & Robert Laird Review by Amaliah S. Marmon-Halm Giving us an interesting portrayal of a modern love story, ‘The Guy with the Bow Tie” tells the tale of a boy, a girl and the daily highs and lows of any relationship. The main twist is that they are constantly followed around by a quirky, spectacled man wearing a bow tie. What is even more peculiar about him is that he is also making note of their every move…a little creepy but let’s just see how this plays out. As things take a turn for the worst for the couple, it looks like it’s up to the “guy” to save them and their relationship. In order to do that, he’ll need to remind the couple of what brought them together and to remember the little things they love about each other. It is adorable to watch as he gives us a modern day version of cupid. There are only a few negatives that I can really note. There is an obvious change in quality and stability when the camera is switched to one set on a drone, which unfortunately results in some scenes lacking in quality. As sweet as the story is, there is a slight issue with the acting. The main premise is that there is no dialogue and that the audience must just feel what the actors are saying and going through. There are a few moments when the chemistry between the actors doesn’t feel as strong as it should but that may be just a slight directing issue. Other than that, this is a lovely little short film that will strike a little chord, even with the coldest of hearts. This story is sure to leave you going “aww” and looking for your nearest and dearest for a cuddle. Maybe there are times in our romantic and platonic relationships where we all need a “guy” to guide us and remind us to show a little love. #shortfilmreview #TheGuywiththeBowTie #amaliahsaramarmonhalm #supportindiefilm

Directed by Alfred Hitchcock Starring Ray Milland & Grace Kelly Review by Joseph Banham If you’re a film enthusiast, you probably don’t need me to tell you who Alfred Hitchcock is. It’s no new revelation to state that his contributions to cinema are legendary. His 1954 film “Dial M for Murder”, which was adapted from a play of the same name by Frederick Knott, is among his less celebrated work. In the timeline of his work “Dial M for Murder” takes its place just after the midpoint, just before Hitch’s glorious indian summer of continuous revered hits at the tail end of his filmography. These include “Rear Window” (1954- succeeding “Dial M for Murder” by a few months); Vertigo (1958), which many consider to be his magnum opus; “North by Northwest” (1959); and “Psycho” (1960). Being eclipsed by such masterworks makes “Dial M” no less of a fantastic achievement, albeit a more subtle and unimposing one. On a personal note, this was the film that acted as my introduction to the grandmaster of cinema. As a kid idly spending a summer holiday afternoon in front of the TV, the film came on after another ( one which I clearly didn’t find nearly as impactful as I’m struggling to remember what it was… possibly the original “Journey to the centre of the Earth”… but I’m digressing). After the typical 11-year-old boy reservations, (“Why would I want to watch anything without monsters or special effects?”), I was promptly gripped to the screen within 10 minutes. I may have been completely unfamiliar with Hitchcock, and never even heard of Grace Kelly, but I knew what I was watching was one of the most viscerally exciting films I had ever experienced. I think this touches on what makes Hitchcock’s work so universally accessible. The feelings that he often taps into are those of fear and suspense- two very primal instincts of human nature. Even if some audience members don’t understand all of the small plot points or pick up on the deeper themes, everybody bolts up on the edge of their seat when the stakes are life and death. The film stars Ray Milland as Tony Wendice, an ex-tennis player who now resides with his wife Margot (Grace Kelly) in a modestly cosy flat in London. It is revealed that Margot has been having an affair with a handsome television crime writer named Mark Halliday, something Tony has come to realise. As the two forbidden lovers go to spend an evening at the theatre, Tony invites an old college friend around, originally referred to as Captain Lesgate (Anthony Lawson), under the guise that he intends to buy a used car from him. In the first of the film’s lengthy dialogue scenes it is gradually revealed that Lesgate is a crook who uses a number of aliases (his real name being Swann) to elude the police, information which Tony intends to use against him in order to extort him into committing his adulterous wife’s murder. And so a complex plan is laid out by Tony, in which Swann can surreptitiously sneak in, strangle Margot, and slip back out without anyone ever knowing he was there whilst providing Tony with an airtight alibi. Of course it doesn’t all go to plan, thanks to some conveniently placed scissors, causing the astute Tony to hastily recalculate, this time framing the scene to implicate Margot. It is then up to the proficient Chief Inspector Hubbard (frequent Alfred Hitchcock Presents actor John Williams) to put the pieces together and prevent Margot from being incriminated and sentenced to death. The film in essentially split into two halves, quite literally, as there is even an intermission screen at the halfway point (this wasn’t uncommon for older films of a certain length.) The first half deals with a setup of the “perfect murder” whilst the second half deals with the aftermath. The script expertly flips the viewer vicariously into the point of view of several characters, creating an emotionally rich and rewarding experience. In the first half the audience is sided with the conspiring villains, with the camera placing them in the room as the third member in on the murder plot. The second half offers up the extremely gratifying experience of following Hubbard as he gradually uncovers the solution to a puzzle we already know the answer to. It is a very Hitchcockian trope for his films to feature fiendishly polite villains; Ray Milland’s performance as the well-mannered Tony makes the character all the more insidious. He is without a doubt the film’s most compelling character, making him a worthy adversary for Inspector Hubbard in the latter half of the film. The script juggles the character in a way that makes him despicable as well as completely relatable. We feel his nerves as the cracks in his scheme start to show, bringing him closer and closer to being found out. During the film’s pivotal centerpiece, the actual execution of the murder plot, the tension is wound to its tightest point creating the most memorable sequence in the film. Having set up the meticulous details of the plan in the previous sequence, knowing exactly what needs to happen and when, the viewer is plunged into the excitement of uncertainty when every little thing that can go wrong does go wrong. Our stomach plummets when Tony realises his watch has stopped making him late for the vital phone call to his accomplice; we lean forward in anticipation as he runs to the phone booth only to find it’s occupied etc. It’s suspense building 101 from the master of the craft, not to mention absolutely riveting filmmaking. The suspense would not work if the audience didn’t have a guilty affection for the gleefully sadistic Tony. This actually leads me to my one major complaint with the film which is that the two main protagonists, Margot and Mark, are simply not very interesting characters. At least not compared to Tony, who completely overshadows them and becomes a more likeable character, leading part of you wishing for him to succeed. This may have been the intention; the film is much more about the machinations of the murderous than the prevailing of the innocent. Margot and Mark are rendered to feel more like plot-devices than fully fleshed out characters, which doesn’t really detract from the core essence of the film but it would have been nice to feel more emotionally attached to Margot’s impending doom. The film was based on a play, and through the dialogue and staging it clearly shows; this is a very talky film. The vast relaying of facts, especially in the first act by Tony to Swann, requires firm attention so as not to get lost in all the minor details of the scheme. There are also several key items integral to the plot (Hitchcock referred to these as “McGuffins”) including a number of house keys which get swapped around and stolen, making them difficult to keep track of. The dialogue driven scenes with many lines of exposition will not be to every viewer’s taste, who may yearn for the atmospheric simplicity of “Rear Window” or “Psycho”. However if you have a fondness for devilish wit sprinkled with irony, then these scenes will prove utterly engrossing. Also like the play, the film is mostly confined to one location: The Wendice’s flat. The structure draws instant comparisons to another claustrophobic Hitchcock Thriller, “Rope” (1948), which incidentally is also about two immensely intelligent men trying to commit the perfect murder. The confined space helps amplify the tension; all the answers the police are looking for are always right under their noses, precariously placing Tony on the verge of devastating failure. Restricted to having only one main set, Hitchcock is reserved in his camera movements. The camera is simply there to subtly frame the action as a quiet observer, accentuating the film’s theatre roots. There is only one instance, during Margot’s trial, where Hitchcock flexes his over-the-top expressionist muscles; The scene sticks out like a sore thumb from the rest of the film as gloriously cheesy, but it works nonetheless. Its worth mentioning that the film was originally meant to be viewed in 3D. Yes, before the surge of stereoscopic stories brought upon us by Avatar, 3D had a short lived run in the early 1950’s. It was later re-released in 1980 in its 3D glory as well as recently in 2013. I unfortunately have never experienced it in 3D, despite owning the 3D compatible blu-ray ( I am yet to own a 3d TV). From what I hear the extra dimension is well implemented, recieving Martin Scorsese’s blessing. I must say, though, it doesn’t seem like the sort of film that would be necessary 3D viewing; the understated camerawork doesn’t really suit the ostentatious nature of three-dimensional filmmaking. If anyone has experienced this version, I would love to hear your views on it in the comments. If you have never seen “Dial M for Murder” and are interested in suspense thrillers, I would highly recommend buying the DVD immediately; it’s a classic of the genre. It’s a great shame that it seems to be less remembered than some other Hitchcock films; Hitchcock himself was less than enthusiastic about the final film, something I just do not understand. I’m personally kicking myself I missed the opportunity to see it on the big screen in 2013. It may not have any moments that are ingrained in the history of cinema as much as the church tower scene from Vertigo or the shower scene from Psycho, but the sum of its parts are no less powerful. #ThrowbackThursday #AlfredHitchcock #JosephBanham #DialMforMurder

Written & Directed by A. P. Stevens Review by Monica Jowett Highly developed technology like Artificial Intelligence and clones have created theories of their actual existence, which The Clone Theory, a short film written and directed by A.P. Stevens, addresses. The first short film from writer/director A.P. Stevens follows a man who has a theory on human clones. Technology is getting smarter and taking over actual life. We see the man sitting at his computer, typing away. As he finishes he rubs his hands over his face, as though fatigued by something. Narrated by Stevens in a lulling and echoing voiceover that states the conspiracy theory he believes, that human clones are real and have formed from the advanced technology we use. The clones have formed personalities based on social media and mimic human traits having watched people through their webcams. The script, performed through the voiceover, has a clear ending though at times generates confusion in what exactly these clones are and what they do. Nevertheless the enigmatic tones of the narrator leave you wanting to find out more, and how this theory developed. A.P. Stevens also stars in the short piece as the human, and the clone. The subtle change of white t-shirt to black t-shirt informs us of this, also symbolising the good and bad. The film consists of many close-up shots; of Stevens’ face, with his glasses reflecting the computer screen, then his hands as he types or places carefully on the table. There are very few wider shots, possibly due to space limitations. However the close ups do enhance the tense atmosphere, that is further developed through the narration and deep sounds of the music. As the clone, which is also portrayed by Stevens, he shifts his performance to show the subtle differences between human and clone, to good effect. For the first film from Stevens, The Clone Theory is a great example of an alternate sci-fi short film. The theory the narrator puts forth could easily be developed into a longer piece and I am interested to see what else Stevens has up his sleeve. #TheCloneTheory #Shortfilm #MonicaJowett #shortfilmreview

Directed by Ben Davies Written by Iestyn Davies, Ben Davies Starring Ollie Parsons, Nathan Apps Review by Hannah Sayer Ginger, directed by Ben Davies, is a short Sci-Fi comedy that was shortlisted as one of the final set of films in the ShortFilm48 2015 competition. Filmed and edited entirely in just 48 hours, this film experiment showcases the talents of a group of teenagers aged 16 to 18 as they create an odd but funny story of an alien’s journey to earth for the perfect root of ginger. This short film focuses on only two characters; a human and an alien, played by Nathan Apps and Ollie Parsons. While walking through the idyllic and peaceful Shropshire countryside, the human notices something crash to the ground in the distance. The alien is introduced into the narrative, as he informs the human that his spaceship has crashed on earth, leaving him stranded. The rest of the short is entirely conversation driven, allowing for understated humour to be at the forefront of the dialogue. The viewer learns that the alien is a chef who has come to earth to collect the spice ginger, as it is the only place in the universe where the perfect root can be found. The opening of the film parodies the Star Wars opening sequence and the Sci-Fi genre as a whole. This is effective as it enables the scene to be set quickly without wasting too much of the restricted running time. At times, there are clear pacing issues where the film feels rushed, but this is understandable considering the timing constraints laid out by the competition. As the human first notices the crash and gets closer to the aftermath of it, the smoke effects used and the atmospheric, eerie music reinforce the Sci-Fi aspect of the genre. However, the slapstick comedy used straight after he runs into the force field and the sharp script demonstrate that this short is more impressive when the focus is turned to comedy and parody. The film is shot entirely outside so the viewer can marvel in the beauty of the Shropshire countryside. The main strength of the short is in its cinematography; the good use of camera work and the impressive panning shots highlight and draw particular attention to the landscape. The cleverly executed ending is notable for a film of such a short nature as it causes the humour to shift from light to dark with the utterance of two single lines. This understated humour that carries the piece allows for the young filmmakers to truly excel in such a demanding time frame. #Ginger #Shortfilm #HannahSayer #ShortFilm48

Written & Directed by Michael Clarke Starring Wendy Trevor & Amy Snitch Review by Natasha Price Ricky Gervais once found himself in some very hot water after replying to the seemingly harmless question 'What advice would you give to someone who wants to be famous overnight?' with the controversial remark, 'Go out and kill a prostitute.' In more detailed reasoning, Gervais explains that he means if you are that focused on being famous, and nothing else, there is no difference between fame and infamy, and so you may as well commit murder if all you desire is to make the papers. This is a subject tackled in “Dead Famous”, the story of a budding serial killer’s first kidnapping, and her goal to go down in history as a notorious murderer – to be someone important. Though a horror, the film is dripping with a dark humour, seemingly tipping its hat to the likes of Psychoville and Inside Number 9, with almost Hitchcockian-like maguffins and visuals clues dotted along the way. The comic relief is effective throughout, “Regretti Spaghetti” being the name of a murderous Italian delivery service and a humorous list of potential serial killer nicknames is listed on a whiteboard in the background of one scene. The film starts strong, building suspense in long, panning shots accompanied by sinister music. A text conversation pops up on screen – a daughter telling her mother there is nothing to be scared of and that there is no one in her house – a classic foreboding tool typical of horrors or thrillers. However, the tension is lost some of the way in, let down by weak acting and some scrappy editing. Shots fade in and out and important beats are missed or dragged on too long by bizarre timing decisions. The wit and humour of the story and script is unfortunately let down by production levels – no dramatic lighting is used to evoke a darker atmosphere, and the sound is patchy and a little distracting. Despite all of these factors, however, the film manages to capture the audience long enough to lead them through the twisting, tricking narrative until the final reward of deceit is revealed at the end and manages to pack a certain amount of punch, worthy of the viewer’s attention for it’s ten minute viewing time. The film works as an experiment in storytelling much more effectively than a foray into production filmmaking. It delves into the darker side on the human mind and in this, points a mirror on society and our obsession with fame. #DeadFamous #ShortFilm #NatashaPrice #MichaelClarke #SupportIndiefilm

Directed by Steve Sage Written by Lee Kolinsky Starring Russ Camarda, Katherine Barron Review by Lauren Nicholls The short film 'Bulified' directed by Steve Sage Productions, is one that is both gripping and engaging for many viewers of various ages. The start of the film pays homage to the classic horror film. A young man is in his house and the camera is outside it, giving a voyeuristic approach for the viewer. We hear a dog barking - it sounds like it is being attacked by something. The young man investigates and instantly the music changes from a classical score to a chilling one. The man is dead, but who is the killer? The scene then changes to a prison cell where we see a man, Riley Samuel, who has victimised people throughout his life since he was a young boy. He is met by Staci, a detective who tries to blame the murders on Riley. What happens next is gripping and unexpected. The film, though only twenty minutes long, provides a great understanding of how a simple twist in a storyline can keep viewers engaged. The editing of the film is incredibly simplistic and is perfect in every way for this film. The direction of the film does not need complicated cinematography and the director has made sure that this is the case. The script for this film is extremely likeable and is reminiscent to Hollywood thrillers (Seven, I'm looking at you here). When talking about growing up, we see Riley telling Staci that “They don't tell you what to do when you find out all of that is impossible,” almost giving her a reasoning as to why he has been bullying people all his life. As a viewer, we want to see more and find out why Riley is victimising people and this seems to be the drive of the storyline. Moreover, the characters are stereotypical. We see a psychopath being interrogated by a tightly-wound detective. This said, the casting is accurate and the film should be commended for this. Both the actors pursue a believable yet delicate performance and it is this that truly carries the short film. Despite these positive aspects, the music presents many problems. We know that sound can really make or break a film and in this case, it seems that it did the latter. Unfortunately, the score can come across as a bit unnecessary at some points of the film and does not add much to its purpose in general. If anything, it seems a bit comical and does not give the film the full gratification it deserves. This film is definitely not for everyone. However, if you enjoy thrillers with plot twists, then this short film is one you will not be disappointed in. #Bullified #Shortfilm #SupportIndieFilms #LaurenNicholls

Directed by John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein Starring Ed Helms, Christina Applegate Review by Jack Martin As yet another modern revitalisation of a comedy classic, this time taking its cues from National Lampoon’s Vacationwith Chevy Chase in the starring role, the new version of Vacation has received some pretty damning feedback from various critics. Words like “unnecessary” and “repugnant” have been thrown about, and it’s becoming one of the most hated films of the year. As you can imagine, we went in with severely lowered expectations – and that surprisingly helped our viewing experience. Not that Vacation is technically a good movie, but from what we had heard we were expecting something much, much worse and instead got something that’s just overall mediocre. If you’ll remember from watching that original movie, which also had director Harold Ramis and writer John Hughes attached to it, it was simply about a disastrous family trip to Disneyland knock-off Walley World. Same thing here, except more of a focus on juvenile sex and bodily fluid jokes. Except in this version, now written and directed by the guys that wrote Horrible Bosses, the son from that first film is now grown up and looking a lot like Ed Helms, and is taking his own family to the theme park, including his unsatisfied wife (Christina Applegate) and two sons, one of whom feels like a missing cast member of The Inbetweeners (Skyler Gisondo) and the other is a bullying little snot (Steele Stebbins) who takes every moment of his spare time to humiliate or torture his wimpy older brother. A far cry from Chase and his own chipper family, then; and we would not fault you in the slightest if you despise this movie based purely on your adoration for the original film and its multiple sequels. We, however, usually like to go in with a fresh mind, and not having even seen any of the previous Vacation movies (it’s on our ever-lasting to-do list) leaves us without the ability to compare it to what came before, although from what we gather the humour in those films are nothing like the kind we get in this movie. This one feels more tailored to the post-Hangover crowd, right down to casting Ed Helms, with tons of gross-out gags and an aggressive back-handedness that only seems to target the mid-teen crowd instead of anyone else. Given the severe backlash that the Hangover films have received in recent years, even the first one, it’s surprising that people still consider gags like attempted murder with a plastic bag or a wad of pubic hair being used to scrub down a bath with blood stains and fungi worthy enough to be included in adult comedies without receiving endless amounts of disdain. We haven’t even mentioned the scene that’s all over the trailers – where Helms and co relax in an open-air lagoon, only for it to really be a dumping ground for raw sewage – which, given this film’s enjoyment of swimming within its own shit, sums up the movie for all that hate it. Honestly, though, our biggest problem with the movie is that it just isn’t that funny. Not every comedy needs to be completely gross-out, and Vacation is a prime example of that; when your movie opens with Ed Helms being forced into a child’s lap head-first, you know you’re in for a ride where the bar is lowered to significant depths several dozen times, from misunderstandings about what a rim-job is to enlarged prosthetic penises worn by Thor himself, Chris Hemsworth. Even though we never saw the original Vacation movies, we can still tell that they never embodied the kind of humour that American Pie or The Hangover were aiming for, and while a brief penis or poop gag is amusing every once in a while, when it’s the whole movie it can get tiresome very quickly. The only funny elements of the film are montages of awkward holiday photos that bookend the film (though the opening slideshow is much funnier than the one that plays over the end credits), and brief cameos by Chase and on-screen wife Beverly D’Angelo later in the film, both reprising their original roles in a sort of torch-passing extended cameo. Other than that, it’s a series of set pieces that aren’t funny with bundles of comedic actors given very weak material to work off of – Christina Applegate, for example, is subject to one particular set-piece that sees her puking gallons of fake vomit while being subjected to a particularly dangerous obstacle course, even for the scene’s setting. Give her some credit, at least she seems game to go with the flow, but even still it’s very embarrassing for someone who can be very funny when they want to. So, with all of that said, is Vacation deserving of being called the worst movie of the year? Honestly, no; we’ve seen much worse so far this year, and in our opinion we’d rather sit through this one again over Unfinished Business, Hot Pursuit, The Gallows or any of the other really bad ones. However, that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily worth recommending, either; if you’re sick of the constant gross-out and mean-spirited humour that American Pie or The Hangover worked with in the past, or if you absolutely adore the old Vacation movies and don’t wish for their good name to be tarnished, then you should definitely skip it. It’s bad, but it’s definitely not the worst; at the very most, Vacation will become just another forgettable cash-in of a franchise nobody talks about anymore. Bit of a wasted journey, if you asked us. Read the original review here - http://www.filmfeeder.co.uk/vacation-review/ #Vacation #TheatricalReleases #JackMartin #UKFilmReview

Directed by Guy Ritchie Starring Armie Hammer, Henry Cavill, & Alica Vikander Review by Kieran Freemantle 2015 is the year of the spy film with the likes of Kingsman: The Secret Service, Spooks: The Greater Good, Spy and Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation all being released and a new entry in the Bond series (Spectre) coming out later this year. In the meantime Guy Ritchie and Warner Brothers are offering the long-awaited adaptation of The Man From U.N.C.L.E. with the hopes of starting another film franchise. The year is 1963 and the Cold War is at its height with the United States and Soviet Union facing off against each other. In East Berlin the CIA's top agent, the suave Napoleon Solo (Henry Cavill), faces off against the KGB's best, the incredibly strong Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer) when Solo helps a young woman, Gabby Teller (Alica Vikander), defect to the West. But irony happens when their superiors in the respective agencies tell them they have to work to together to stop a group of ex-Nazis from making a nuclear bomb and need Gabby to get them access to the group. The Man From U.N.C.L.E. has been in development hell since the 1990s, with directors like Quentin Tarantino and Steven Soderbergh and a host of actors being attached to the project before Guy Ritchie was giving the directing duties. He reunites with his Sherlock Holmes producer Lionel Wigram and on the surface they seem like a good fit due to the Sherlock Holmes series' historical setting and the love-hate chemistry between Robert Downey Jr's Sherlock and Jude Law's Watson. They wanted to recreate that magic with The Man From U.N.C.L.E. and they have an easy setting for this, both men have opposing ideologies and world outlooks; Solo is a roguish agent who enjoys the finer things of life, looks immaculate in expensive suits and is a ruthless womaniser. Kuryakin is a by-the-books type with simpler tastes, a fierce temper and has the psychical and mental determination of a terminator. Both are equally effective but for different reasons and both men are gorillas beating their chests to show their prowess, skills and spy tools. They distrust each other to the point of planting bugs on the other but their friendship and mutual respect grows. Cavill and Hammer are fine in the lead roles but they are not a match to what Downey Jr and Law had in the Sherlock Holmes series. The Sherlock Holmes pair had a great back-and-forth, Holmes being an uncontrollable eccentric and Watson is the straight man who is not willing to put up with Holmes' behaviour. Cavill and Hammer do have some witty jabs against each other but both are straight-laced characters and The Man From U.N.C.L.E. has a more serious tone than you would expect. Alicia Vikander shows off her lighter side after having very heavy roles in Testament of Youth and Ex Machina; she is a lot of fun having to be the woman who has to break Solo and Kuryakin up when they bricker and there’s an enjoyable moment when she dances and attempts to loosen Kuryakin. There are some physical moments in her performance that rise a chuckle, and a subtlety in her performance. Vikander’s appearance also takes away any homoerotism that is usually a recurring theme in Ritchie's films. The Man From U.N.C.L.E. was made on a budget of $75 Million which is fairly low for a summer action film. As a result the film is not as action-packed as one would expect or hope. Most of the action appears at the beginning and the end of the film with the middle sagging. There is a fun car chase on the streets of Berlin with the camera zooming in and out during the sequence and Ritchie showing off his proficiency for staging an action sequence. Another car chase on an Italian island was a highlight, repeating the same techniques, as Solo and Kuryakin are chasing the same target from different directions. The boat chase at night is also a moment of enjoyment, but the shoot-outs and hand-to-hand combat are fairly rudimentary affairs and Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation and Kingsman: The Secret Service easily surpass The Man From U.N.C.L.E. Cavill was famously considered to play James Bond in Casino Royale but lost out to Daniel Craig. His performance here felt like it was an audition tape for the role after Craig is finished as Bond. He is decent enough in the role as he beds ladies and wears his suits and there some impressive moments as the camera focuses on his face and emotion wears on him, with Daniel Pemberton's music amplifying the scene: one of them is an effective torture sequence that felt like Ritchie was repeating a similar shot in Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. Plus he is allowed to say some witty quiffs. But there are better candidates to be MI6's best (i.e. Michael Fassbender). Back in 2013 William Hill made Guy Ritchie the favourite to direct the 24th Bond film when Sam Mendes originally said he would not return. The Man From U.N.C.L.E. was also his showcase in what he could do if given the reins of James Bond. With John Mathieson's cinematography and the Art Department's eye of period detail, Ritchie makes a very flashy, stylish film that oozes 60s cool, using vintage cars and clothing, visiting a high society function and Solo showing off his skills; it felt very much like the Sean Connery Bond films. The villains even have their own private island which is basically a Bond lair and a military force has to invade. Composer Daniel Pemberton also adds to the 60s feel because of his jazzy style score and uses some songs from the era. Yet Ritchie's distinctive style is present, such as his use of flashbacks to reveal an action as some sort of ploy. The Man of U.N.C.L.E. is a distinctly average film and with Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation also in cinemas your money is best spent seeing the Tom Cruise vehicle. This film is a second tier entry in comparison to this year's spy films, summer blockbusters and in the filmography of Guy Ritchie. #TheManfromUNCLE #KieranFreemantle #TheatricalReleases #GuyRitchie #HenryCavill #ArmieHammer #AlicaVikander

DIRECTOR: Jamie Hooper CAST: Tim Blackwell, Debra Baker, Lucy Hutchinson, Tom Geoffrey Review by Jack Martin Some of the more intriguing short films only offer glimpses of the bigger picture rather than just telling a full story from beginning to end, but those glimpses need to have a genuine sense of surprise that comes like a right hook to the jaw. With this in mind, Terry and Brenda is certainly something of a surprise when it comes to its own revelations, and we are left asking ourselves “how”, “why” and, most importantly, “who”. A muscly debut from writer/director/producer/editor/cinematographer/tea-boy (or at least we assume the latter, especially given its strong presence here) Jamie Hooper, the short begins with a series of rather mundane scenarios that may or may not ring true with many middle-aged couples, such as figuring out the identity of an old friend that they bumped into earlier or arguing what the difference is between RoboCop and The Terminator. So far, so neutral – that is, until we get one-thirds of the way through, where things suddenly start to unravel about this couple we probably never would have thought of before. No spoilers here, but for now we’ll say that things get a little more uncomfortable depending on your, erm, interests. As director and cinematographer, Hooper is able to create a sinister atmosphere out of the most normal activities, like making tea in tacky souvenir mugs and so on, which help enforce that feeling of dread and tension despite the most non-threatening on-screen activities. Working with his simplistic script, actors Tim Blackwell and Debra Baker manage to give convincing, understated performances as the couple in question, with their own unique hints of personality behind their dull exteriors. Should this short be expanded, we’d definitely like to see more of these people together – and what they might do next. In the end, Terry and Brenda offers a darkly comic view on middle-age partnership, as well as an exploration of the things some people will do to keep whatever shades of love there is left alive – even if it means doing things beyond your reach. We’re certainly intrigued by their possible further adventures… You can read the original review here: http://www.filmfeeder.co.uk/terry-brenda-short-film-review/ #TerryandBrenda #shortfilm #JackMartin

Directed by Josh Trank Starring Miles Teller, Kate Mara & Michael B. Jordan Review by Chris Olson "Fantastic Failure" If you are exhausted from reading about another superhero/reboot it's probably because the studios-that-be have left us little time to ponder the cultural impact of their output before blasting us with another movie, whilst offering smaller returns in terms of creative gold. And this particular reboot from Twentieth Century Fox seems to be suffering from a fatigue of its own, perhaps from being overwrought with concern about any accusations of copying the "formula"... Starting out with copious amounts of tedious computer gazing and science fair calamity, Fantastic 4 barely gets off the starting line by the middle third, by which time the majority of the audience has sighed a sigh of resignation that, yes, it probably is as bad as everyone told them before heading to the cinema. The film manages to pick up the pace when the characters get their inevitable superpowers; stretchy bloke, rock bloke, fire bloke and see-through woman, which creates a bit of razzle dazzle and theatrics before deciding too much fun was being had, and they must stop! It's not Guardians after all. Throw back in some more computer screens and enough bland space jargon to choke Christopher Nolan and we move into a short lived climax and are all home before dinner. With no attempt at flair, character chemistry or an interesting plot, it's like the filmmakers made a good and bad list before making a comic film, and picked up the wrong one as a checklist. Even tried and tested clichés which could be found in the first F4 outing were avoided, for fear of stepping on anyone’s toes. This pussyfooting about has left a chasm of drab and dreary filmmaking that fails to even consider an audience that might fall into it. Performances are so un-noteworthy it seems impossible to remember what any of them did in the film. Jamie Bell checks out as early as possible, and you might suffer from Whiplash looking at Miles Teller as he consistently misses his beats. Far from glorying in this epic fail, most audiences just seem let down by a film that had all the right ingredients but decided to blend them all up until what was left was an unrecognisable mush of tepid nothingness. The irony of having Fantastic in the movie title is not lost on anyone, and the failure of this film goes to show that audiences are not just satisfied with “any old comic film”. The successes of recent years from the big hitters, are not solely down to bad ass budgets and brand recognition. Instead, if you want to throw down with the heavyweights, you sure as hell better bring some big game. #FantasticFour #TheatricalReleases #ukfilmreview #ChrisOlson #MilesTeller #JamieBell