Just because something’s ‘slow’, it doesn’t always mean it’s bad.

Take Stephen Hawkins, for instance. While he lacks the sizzle of Eddie Murphy, what he says counts – his robotic ramblings more captivating than a three-legged banjo player in a trouser shop.

Then there’s Anton Corbin’s slow-burn thriller, The American. Sure it’s slow, but like Stephen Hawkin’s on a scuba diving expedition, it’s got depth.

George ‘The American’ Clooney

The American stars George Clooney as an assassin on the run from a mob of angry Swedes. Laying low in a quiet European town, Clooney is tasked with one final job before hanging up his guns.

Don’t be fooled by the pitch, though. The American has about as much in common with a Michael Bay film as a bold man does with hair gel.

Here, the action is only occasional, the sporadic violence a mirror reflecting back the inner turmoil of Clooney’s complex gunslinger. And that’s what The American is – a character study of a man so detached from the social order that he makes George W Bush look like a children’s entertainer.

The Hitman Genre

The American is far from original, ticking all the tropes of the hitman genre with the precision of a Bulgarian ballerina. Even so, Corbin’s unnerving attention to detail and refusal to be swayed by the lures of explosive action, elevates The American above it’s genre credentials.

On top of that, Clooney owns the role, tapping into the detachment of past characters inhabited in Michael Clayton and Up in the Air. Perhaps it’s just me, but I could watch Clooney peel onions for two-hours – the guy is a captivating screen presence.

Coming to America

If you’re looking for a balls-out action thriller, The American is likely to disappointment. The mixed reviews seem to be largely down to the confusion caused over the trailer which misleading paints the movie as nuts and bolts genre piece.

Personally, though, I found The American to be a beautifully meditative piece of filmmaking.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

Either way, it’s this juxtaposition between comedy and action which ultimately belies the movie’s central problem. For the best part of an hour, though, I was more entertained than a gypsy in peg shop.

Knight and Day : A Tale of Two Cities

Knight and Day is a typical fish-out-of-water movie. June, played by Cameron Diaz, becomes embroiled in one high octane chase after another following a chance encounter with Tom Cruise’s fugitive, super-spy.

The actors revel in the absurdity of the movie, hamming it up like two pigs in a deli. Cruise and Diaz are hotter together than a band of Singapore hooker’s in mating season – chemistry bubbling off the screen like some fourth grader’s volcano experiment.

Couple this central-pairing with James Mangold’s directorial efforts and Knight and Day comfortably rises above its middle-of-the-road summer action credentials.

Too Much Transformers

Knight and Day plays out like an epic battle between a vegan and a meat eater atop a cloud engulfed mountain. While the vegan puts up a good fight for an hour, eventually the protein-high antagonist wins out.

What I’m trying to say is this: in the end, too much action, not enough laughs. The premise wears thin as the Michael Bay-esque crash and bang takes centre-stage.

Even so, Knight and Day is a fun film and, while it wobbles like an arthritic golfer at times, it’s sure to keep you on the edge of your seat.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

True to form, Resident Evil Afterlife is a blend of good and bad and like a Mars Bar, too many will leave you feeling sick.

Resident Evil Afterlife: WTF Just Happened?

Thirty minutes into Resident Evil Afterlife and I hadn’t a clue what was going on. Like a nudist who accidentally stumbled onto the set of a porn film, things were unclear.

From what I could tell, the action unfolds in a world ravaged by a virus infection where Alice, played by Mila Jovovich, continues her battle against the Umbrella Corporation.

To get a handle on the film, refer to the opening scene where the antagonist is established in unintentionally hilarious fashion. The camera settles on a ominous figure clad head-to-toe in black, a pair of obligatory shades hanging from his angular face – a clear signifier of villainous qualities if ever I’ve seen one.

Prowling an underground command centre with the menace of a lost duck, an insubordinate henchman makes the mistake of questioning his authority. Like any good boss, Mr Black responds in kind by shooting him in the face – ohhh, nasty. Casually turning around, he asks: “Does anybody else have any questions?”

Enough said.

Resident Evil Afterlife: Cliché City

After the confusion of the opening, Resident Evil Afterlife settles down into a half decent zombie-escape movie. With a nod to the claustrophobic settings of Dawn of the Dead and Escape from New York, Alice takes refuge in a ramshackle building.

As it turns out, her current place of residence is in fact a prison. Luckily enough, the guy from Prison Break – Wentworth Miller – turns up to break her out.

What are the odds of that?

If I ever wound up trapped inside a zombie-infested prison, I’d want old Wentworth as my cell mate.

Resident Evil: The film Franchise continues

It’s no spoiler to say the movie’s finale clearly hints that the audience can expect to see Resident Evil back in the cinemas at some point in the future. While the franchise continues to turn a profit, no doubt we’ll be inundated with sequels. Like a fat guy in a sweet shop, it makes perfect economic sense.

While I can’t really recommended Resident Evil Afterlife, I’ll say this: if you choose to watch it, remove your brain and place carefully in the nearest available washing machine because you won’t be needing it any time soon.

In the words of my good mate Ron Seal, Resident Evil Afterlife does “exactly what it says on the tin”.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

With this in mind, I decided against watching Clash of the Titans at my local cinema after critics pounced on it like a band of rabid sumo wrestlers. Besides, it was cold outside. I’d wait for the Blu-ray.

Fast-forward three months and I’m slipping the rental from its sleeve more warily than a learner driver in a tank. My expectations were admittedly low.

Sure, Clash of the Titans wasn’t the best thing since sliced bread. But like a blind tightrope walker in a wind tunnel, the film had something about it.

Clash of the Titans: An Inoffensive Action Film

Much to my surprise, Clash of the Titans was pretty decent. It’s a middle of the road action movie which is less demanding than a stuffed parrot.

Sam Worthington takes the reins of Demi-god Perseus who seeks vengeance against Hades after the murder of his adopted family. Worthington squares-off against a band of oversized scorpions, Medusa and a Kraken, before a final showdown with his archenemy.

Sam Worthington as an Action Hero

Sam Worthington is fast becoming the go-to-guy for action movies, his turn in Clash of the Titans coming hot on the heels of Terminator Salvation and Avatar. To be honest though, it’s a bit of a mystery to me why he’s so hot right now.

Sure, he’s a good looking fellow, but he lacks the charisma of contemporaries such as Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis.

That said, Worthington does deliver a decent enough performance as the stubbly-faced, fisherman turned warrior, Perseus.

In fact, held against Liam Neeson’s turn as Zeus, you’d be forgiven for mistaking him as the new De-Niro – step aside Viggo Mortensen, there’s a new sheriff in town.

Neeson isn’t alone though. One-note acting is pretty much a staple of Clash of the Titans.

Come to think of it, Worthington probably was the best thing in it!

Clash of the Titans: Great Entertainment

Clash of the Titans is a paint-by-numbers action flick with just enough oomph to make it a fun watch.

If you can get past the acting and occasionally dodgy special effects, the movie plays as great entertainment.

Clash of the Titans is proof that you shouldn’t always listen to critics – unless you’re reading my reviews!

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

Sylvester Stallone’s campaign to revive 80’s action continues with his latest movie, The Expendables.

Stallone’s meathead fest is less original than a turkey sandwich. And the plot isn’t any different. It’s flatter than an astronaut in a trouser press. Then there’s the acting – if you can call it that.

Yet a weird thing happens when you pull all these parts together. The Expendables actually works. It’s a mindless action movie which has no other aspiration than to entertain its audience.

And it is on this basis that The Expendables should be judged.

The Expendables: A Dependable 80’s Style Action Flick

Critics have slammed The Expendables harder than Mr Steroid himself, Hulk Hogan. Thankfully Hogan is nowhere to be seen in this movie.

Were it not for its a-list cast – and by a-list, I mean action list – then The Expendables would no doubt be straight to DVD fodder.

The presence of Sly Stallone, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Steve Austin, Eric Roberts, Jason Statham and Mickey Rourke, elevates The Expendables into a must-see movie for any action junkie.

The group dynamic works, but only just. And the huge cast list means there is little time to flesh the characters out. True to the 80’s action flick, Stallone relies on clichés, prejudice, racial and social stereotypes. The Chinese guy knows martial arts and the bold fellow is handy with a knife – it’s that simple.

And besides, everything is just an excuse to parachute our band of mercenaries into a fictional South American country. I mean, if you’re hunting bad guys, where better to look?

The Expendables: Stallone as Director

Stallone has proved his abilities behind the camera time and time again. So to lambaste his directorial effort in The Expendables seems to be missing the point.

It was only a few years back that Stallone updated his Rambo saga, infusing 80’s action with the modern-day, fast-cutting style, we have become accustomed to.

Stallone goes even further in the The Expendables. He strips the action back to its barebones, harnessing the type of unfussy camera which is a staple of his generation’s action films.

His straightforward direction captures the tone and absurdist beats of movies like Commando, Rambo and Predator.

Is it as good as such classics? Not in the slightest. Will it fade into the filmic history? Probably.

Even so, in an age of effects-driven, MTV–style action films for kids, it’s refreshing to see a movie which only exists to kick ass.

Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis

Stallone understands the limitations of the action genre – it was he, after all, along with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis, who pretty much defined it during the 80’s.

And sure, the decision to inscribe the names of Schwarzenegger and Willis on the poster is a little misleading. They do, after all, only get two minutes of screen time.

But the chance to see Planet Hollywood engage in an onscreen threesome, albeit a quickie, turns the wet dreams of millions of action fans into a reality.

It’s a reverential moment which lays bare Stallone’s self-aware approach to The Expendables.

The Expendables: Sex in the City for Men

The Expendables is a very rare thing indeed – a violent action flick, for adults, in 2010.

While it isn’t perfect, it is fun. It’s an 80’s action film which has travelled through time to the noughties.

If you’re looking for a two-hour lobotomy, then The Expendables could just be the film for you.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

At the very least, it’s a dilemma we’ve all faced at some point in our lives – what would happen if we fought back against everyday injustices?

Herein resides the selling point of Kick Ass. The movie subverts the superhero genre and lays bare the vicious realities facing cape crusaders.

And by the beard of Zeus, it does it in style.

Kick Ass: A Superhero Movie with a Difference

Kick Ass sees unremarkable high school student, Dave Lizewski, fulfil his ambition of becoming a real life superhero.

Tired of being pushed around, he fights back. Dave quickly learns that a fondness of comic books doesn’t mean he is Batman.

Picking himself from the gutter more times than Tiger Woods, Kick Ass attracts the attention of accomplished crime fighters Big Daddy and Hit-Girl. They join forces to bring down New-York Mafioso, Frank D’Amico.

Nicolas Cage delivers a standout turn as Big Daddy. Channelling the charm of Adam West’s 1960’s Batman, Cage revels in the absurdity of his character. When Cage is good, he’s very good. When he’s bad, he’s Wicker Man.

Meanwhile…

Kick Ass director, Matthew Vaughn, skillfully subverts and embraces the clichés of superhero films, whilst always entertaining.

He wraps a superhero spoof, a teen comedy and ultra-violent action film into one hell of a tight package.

Is Kick Ass Morally Reprehensible?

Vaughn has been criticised for his use of graphic violence and decision to cast 13-year-old actress Chloe Moretz as the assassin, Hit Girl.

Grounding moments of staggeringly realistic violence in a completely fantastical, comic book world, is bound to raise a few eyebrows.

And it’s this clash between the fantastic and the real which seems to be driving the criticism.

Take Fish Tank as a case in point. An unflinching look at child abuse, abandonment and poverty takes place through the eyes of 15 year old Mia. The film was critically received and rightly so.

A similarly complex subtext resides at the heart of Kick Ass. Some critics, it would seem, believe dramatic realism cannot be partnered with comic book sensibilities.

To my mind though, a film shouldn’t have to play out against a gritty urban backdrop to be deemed credible or socially acceptable.

Kick Ass is imbued with enough depth to justify its violence. As for the obscenities which spew from the mouth of our 13-year old heroine, they’re no worse than those of Mia in Fish Tank.

If it’s ok in Fish Tank, it’s ok in Kick Ass.

Kick Ass: A Superhero for our Times

Kick Ass is a love letter to comic books. It’s a shockingly entertaining movie, so well crafted that it could be mistaken for Mount Rushmore.

Like a midget at a rock concert, Kick Ass will keep you on your feet at all times.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

As the end credits rolled, the laughs dissolved to giggles, the giggles to calm.

Then came the extras. My jaw, still vibrating from laughter, hit the deck harder than a skydiving rhino. I had, it would seem, misjudged the filmmakers’ intentions.

Ninja: The Funniest Unfunny Film of All Time

As it turns out, comedy was the last thing on the mind of Ninja director, Isaac Florentine. He was looking to hang a pioneering action movie on the coat peg of contemplative ancient Japanese philosophy.

Florentine and his crew are sincere in their intentions. I don’t question that. And their filmic convictions bleed through to the final cut of Ninja.

But their aspiration to elevate Ninja’s action-adventure credentials never marries with the fact that the film looks as though it was made by a group of 10 year-olds.

It’s this clash of ideals that leaves Ninja hammier than a tin of Spam.

Ninja: A Martial Arts Cliché

Ninja plays like a parody of the martial arts genre. The plot, which makes no sense at all, is cheesier than a pizza factory.

Let me channel the spirit of Master Sensei to tell you the story of Ninja: ah, yes, there is a warrior, Evil Ninja, dressed all in black. Evil Ninja is well-trained in the ways of chopsuey. He lives in a Japanese Dojo with his brother, Good Ninja. Evil Ninja, full of rage and jealousy, tries to kill Good Ninja during a sparring session. Master Sensei is very angry with Evil Ninja and banishes him from Dojo. Then there is sacred wooden box. Wooden box must be protected.

Good Ninja takes wooden box to vault in New York City – ah, Big Apple. Japan, it would seem, has no vaults.

Years later, Evil Ninja returns home. He is unwelcome. Evil Ninja chops off Sensei’s head after refusing to give him wooden box. Evil Ninja heads off to Big Apple for showdown with Good Ninja. The end.

Ninja: More Comedy Value Than a Dancing Chicken

Ninja is a brainless action extravaganza which could have easily been made in the 80s. The movie is stuck in a time warp, the only semblance of modernity creeping through in occasionally Matrix-esque fight scenes.

But the movie is so earnest and cute that it’s hard to hate. Anything that makes you laugh has to have some good points.

Take the script, for example, it’s full of comedic gems. They go something like this:

INT – SOME GUY’S HOUSE – NIGHT

Good Ninja sits down to tea with a total stranger. The conversation is slim so he kick-starts a dialogue with his new friend.

GOOD NINJA

My dad was a drunk. He finally drank himself off the edge of a cliff when I was 12.

EXT – NEW YORK SIDEWALK – DAY

A band of Russian thugs, all in matching jackets, chase Good Ninja and his lady friend down a busy New York street. They want them dead; it’s only a matter of time. An endless stream of bullets spray in the direction of our heroes. Luckily, none of them reach their intended targets, passers-by providing meaty human shields.

CUT TO:

RUSSIAN THUG #9

(to Russian thug #11)

Remember!!!!! We need them alive!!!

Word of advice boys:  if you need them alive, stop shooting at them!!!!

Ninja: The Best-Worst Movie

There are some genuinely impressive moments of action in Ninja. Unfortunately, they are lost under the weight of a confusing script, god-awful acting and the fact that it’s hard to focus when you’re rolling round on the floor in laughter.

Let’s bring the curtain down on this review by recalling one final classic scene from the movie:

Evil Ninja cuts the power to a police station, throwing it into darkness. Stealthily slipping though the building, Evil Ninja hears a group of concerned cops up ahead. Fearful of being seen in the pitch black, Evil Ninja deploys a smoke bomb.

Rating: 1 out of 5 stars

The British director, famed for tightly constructed, low-budget horror movies, tones down the glamour of films such as 300 and Gladiator in favour of his trademark, gritty approach.

Centurion delivers exactly what you’d expect from a Marshall movie: crunching battles, gallons of blood and frenetic action. For all its promise though, Centurion is a pretty tame affair.

Centurion: Breaking Heads, Not New Ground

Centurion is ostensibly a chase movie which centres on a band of chard Roman soldiers spearheaded by the ambidextrous talent of Michael Fassbender.

And the film follows a tight pattern: a mischievous scallywag slits the throats of credulous characters every other minute. Gallons of blood gush forth with the force of a broken water main.

At first, this is shocking, perhaps even a little exciting. It doesn’t take long till you’ve become desensitised to the violence, though. If you rub mustard on your face for long enough, I suppose it might start to get annoying.

Centurion: A Sword and Sandals Movie for the 21st Century

Centurion is a tightly made film which carries the idiosyncratic stamp we’ve come to expect from Marshall.

It is a decent movie.

Be that as it may, it’s my least favourite in his back-catalogue. Centurion’s ceaseless carnage chomps up the charm and wit of Doomsday, The Descent and Dog Soldiers.

That’s not to say Centurion is without humour. The band of burley Roman conquerors sound like a group of lads down the local on a Saturday night and there are some one-liners, so clunky, that they must have been intentional.

Centurion is average fare but still packs a harder punch than the majority of historical action films to emerge from Hollywood.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

The A-Team 2010: Film Review

If you haven’t guessed already, last night I went rodeo riding. I also caught The A-Team at my local multiplex.

So it was I sat down, high on 80s nostalgia, to sift through the opinions of fellow film critics. Arriving at Roger Ebert’s website via those of Mark Kermode and the Film Junk boys, I was surprised how personally he had taken The A-Team.

I have nothing but respect for his filmic musings and sure, when a film gets under your skin, it gets under your skin.

But Ebert seemed more agitated than a canary in a coal mine. He was fuming.

The A-Team: CreativePen versus Roger Ebert

It’d be remiss of me to claim The A-Team breaks any new ground. It doesn’t.

I can’t shake the feeling though that Ebert overlooks one crucial point in his review: namely that The A-Team is a fun summer action movie. For my end, it performs this function well.

What Roger Ebert said about The A-Team:

“The A-Team is an incomprehensible mess with the 1980s TV show embedded inside. The characters have the same names, they play the same types, they have the same traits, and they’re easily as shallow. That was OK for a TV sitcom, which is what the show really was, but at over two hours of Queasy-Cam anarchy, it’s punishment.”

Okay, Roger. I’m with you that the TV show is akin to a sitcom. And it’s true to say the camera in the remake is shakier than a pole-dancer with vertigo.

Allow me to prefix this argument by also confessing to being a child of the 80s. The A-Team, more than any other show, captured my imagination.

So maybe I’m blinded by nostalgia, but I felt the remake evoked the spirit of the original while successfully updating it for a modern audience.

And so what if the characters are shallow? It was always the camaraderie between The A-Team which really made things work.

Let’s take a quick look at the line-up:

• Liam Neeson ticks all the boxes as Colonel Hannibal Smith. He subtly embodies the tongue-and-cheek wit of George Peppard, while convincing as an Iraq war veteran.
• Bradley Cooper is perfect as Face: the good-looking, wise-cracking, lady-killer who gets what he wants, when he wants.
• Sharlto Copley’s turn as Howling Mad Murdock proves his performance in District 9 wasn’t a fluke.
• And Quinton ‘Rampage’ Jackson, who has the toughest job in the role of B.A Baracus, does a reasonably good job of invoking the Mohawk marvel. The UFC fighter is never as intimidating as Mr T, but who is?

Roger Ebert continues his attack against The A-Team:

“The movie uses the new style of violent action, which fragments sequences into so many bits and pieces that it’s impossible to form any sense of what’s happening, or where, or to whom. The actors appear in flash-frames, intercut with shards of CGI and accompanied by loud noises, urgent music and many explosions.”

If Ebert was talking about Michael Bay’s Transformers, I’d have to pat him on the back. His description beautifully sums up Bay’s loud, brash, semi-pornographic take on a children’s classic.

The A-Team, on the other hand, is a family action film and while it alludes to violence, we rarely see any consequences ensue the hailstorm of bullets. The movie is a live-action cartoon which wears its absurdity on its sleeve.

And given that director Joe Carnahan never tries to elevate the film beyond the limitations of its basic premise, what emerges is two hours of mindless fun.

Roger Ebert is less than impressed by the action in The A-Team:

“The A-Team has an action scene that admirably demonstrates Newton’s Third Law, which instructs us that for every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction. The movie illustrates this as the heroes fall from an exploding airplane while inside an armored tank. As the tank hurtles to the ground (cf. Newton’s Law of Gravity), the team leader, Hannibal Smith, looks out an opening and barks out commands for the tank’s gun. I am paraphrasing: “Turn 45 degrees to the left! Fire! Twenty-five degrees to the right! Fire!” In this way, he is able to direct the fall of the tank and save their lives. This is very funny.”

I’m no scientist – Ebert may well have a point here. The whole scene is totally absurd and in the ‘real world’, tanks don’t fly.

One small interjection though: this isn’t the real world, this is The A-Team.

While it may defy Newtonian logic, I found the scene to be a genuinely inventive and absurdist moment of action cinema.

The A-Team: I Love it When a Remake Comes Together

Ebert makes his case against The A-Team with the distinguished aplomb he is famed for. His argument, in many ways, is a compelling one. I just don’t buy it.

The A-Team ramps up the action and tones down some of the campy elements of the television show. It’s a live-action cartoon with over-the-top scenes aplenty.

While the last act overstays its welcome, the film marks a surprisingly fun entry in a so far lacklustre summer season.

The A-Team is like a microwave meal: it’s quick, easy and full of empty calories. It’s still a treat though.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

Read Roger Ebert’s full review here…

Hollywood continues to suck every inch of life out of the vampire genre. The market is awash with movies about blood sucking fiends – and I’m not talking about Michael Bay.

It’s always refreshing then to see a movie like Daybreakers challenge the accepted formula.

Despite its best efforts though, Daybreakers never really lives up to its intriguing premise.

Daybreakers: A Vampire movie with a Difference

Daybreakers kicks things off by turning the vampire genre on its head. The world looks different upside down. Vampires are the dominant race, the dwindling human population reduced to mere paupers.

With the blood supply drying up, the Vampire mainstream faces a race against time to secure their survival.

Cut straight from the dystopian cloth of George Orwell’s 1984, Daybreakers presents an interesting exposé on life in the vampire kingdom. And the socio-political subtext is rather timely. Daybreakers subtly explores issues of immigration, the class divide and the financial crisis.

The Gothic Aesthetic in the 21^st Century

Michael and Peter Spierig, the writing/directing duo behind this near-future vampire thriller, seamlessly blend the Gothic aesthetic with the film’s 2017 timestamp.

The beautifully rendered set design echoes the gothic landscapes of Tim Burton’s Batman.

I’m not sure why, but this reminds me of a story:

A few days back I bumped into pop-star Cliff Richard at a health food store. Cliff was rummaging through the dried foods section when I got to telling him about an old school friend of mine – also named Richard – who had the misfortune of falling off a cliff many years earlier.

He plummeted 50 foot onto a cluster of jagged rocks below. Doctors said it was a miracle that he walked away with little more than cuts and bruises.

Kids being kids though, he quickly earned the title of Cliff Richard. A name, I might add, which stands till this day. My pop-star buddy looked back at me with disbelief as I assured him of the story’s veracity.

Daybreakers: Now Where Was I?

…Oh yeah, the set and lighting design is superb.

Michael and Peter Spierig create immersive environments the likes of which can be seen in classics such as Children of Men, Dark City and Blade Runner.

But as the saying goes: looks aren’t everything.

After the 40 minute mark, the intriguing premise ends as so many movies do these days. It goes all Transformers. Fight scenes aplenty explode off the screen as the fate of the world rests in the hands of a group of characters. Throw in an army of machine gun-toting vampires and the rest is history.

To its credit , Daybreakers resists the temptation of engaging in Matrix-style fighting. Slow-mo kung-fu has become the lazy man’s answer to action nowadays. So it’s interesting that our heroes in Daybreakers are about as handy with their fists as Ghandi.

It’s always boggled my mind how, in many vampire films, the living dead emerge from their muddy graves with the skill set of Bruce Lee. If my childhood taught me anything, it’s that you can’t learn the ways of the ninja simply by watching Karate Kid.

Daybreakers: Time for the Sun to Come Up

Daybreakers is a promising work that falls down under the weight of its own limitations.

In the end it simply bites off more than it can chew – and I tried so hard to avoid vampire puns in this review!

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars – available on Blu-ray and DVD