Film Review - The Social Network (2010)

The Social Network is the latest film from director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin and concerns the origins of the hit social networking site Facebook as well as the ups and downs.

Now I know when I reviewed Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps that I said that that film was the last one of the year that I had any interest in, well I did have some interest in The Social Network even though it's released after that film, mainly due to the film's hype generated by the reviews from critics, most of which say that it was the film of the year.

But are they right: Well, Yes and No, for these reasons, for the first 2/3rds of the film's running time the movie is on top form, Sorkin's script churns out enough wit and social commentary to keep the viewer interested, this is backed up by Eisenberg's amazing performance as Mark Zuckerburg, the founder of Facebook, his timing is spit perfect and he comes across as a cross between Data from Star Trek The Next Generation and Gordon Gekko from Wall Street, a socially disconnected person who analyses everything and everyone around him and can do dangerous things with it when motivated, something that his partners should have seen right from the start as the signs were clearly there to see.

But unfortunately, the film has a pretty big failing and that is the last act, strangely enough this coincides with when they meet the character played by Justin Timberlake, from here I felt it turned into a replay of the first Wall Street film Oliver Stone made, with Zuckerburg turned into the Bud Fox character Charlie Sheen played in that film and JT as Gekko, the slick business man who takes to naive dreamer under his wing and leads him right down the garden path while manipulating him at the same time, to bolster that viewpoint Andrew Garfield's character also takes on the Martin Sheen role from that film, as the straight laced man who tries to point out to his friend that he's being manipulated, even if Zuckerburg tells him otherwise, which leads to a somewhat lacklustre conclusion to the film which is a pity as when this film was good, it was very good.

Overall, this is a pretty good film for the most part but the third act scrambles it, so a 4 out of 5 for The Social Network.

Film Review - Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010)

Prince of Persia is based on the video game of the same name and is also the latest blockbuster from veteran producer Jerry Bruckheimer, the story here is that there is a young boy from the streets (who's totally not Aladdin) who is adopted by a king as he shows great courage, but the prince played by Jake Gyllenhall soon finds himself on the adventure of a lifetime with a mystical princess played by Gemma Arterton.

To be honest, this movie sucked the big one, not as much as Robin Hood did but was a little better than Clash of the Titans, Gyllenhall is pretty much the best thing about the movie as he's pretty good in holding his own, however this film had no script at all, the battle scenes were pretty much the same as the game that inspired this movie and Arterton was a little too much like Carrie Fisher in the first Star Wars.

But that's not all that this movie suffers from, it also suffers from a villain which pretty much makes you think "I'm the bad guy" the moment he's introduced and there's the return of our old friend the reset button, plus that time honoured tradition of a good and respectful actor making a complete idiot of himself for a few dollars more, ah the little things in life.

So overall as I said, this movie sucks and isn't worth your time, hopefully Toy Story 3 can redeem the blockbuster season before Twilight sucks out it's audience, but please don't see this I mean it's only got a 1 out of 5 and you wouldn't see a movie rated only that high right.

Right?

Film Review - Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (2010)

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is the sequel to the popular 1987 film from Oliver Stone, who also directs this movie, the story this time is that Gordon Gekko played by Michael Douglas is now out of jail and wants back in on the game of financial trading, and Jake Moore played by Shia LaBeouf may just be the key to do just that.

Before I give you my overall thoughts I'm going to regal you with a tale of woe, I had really been looking forward to this movie and it was the last of the year that held my interest and as the release date approached I got excited and was anticipating my chance to get to my cinema to see it, sadly the powers that be conspired against me and the afternoon session I desired slipped through my fingers, making me VERY unhappy but I held out hope that this was only for the first week but as the second rolled around again my hopes were dashed, but after that second week the film stopped playing, and my anger grew big time but as fate would have it, I was thrown a bone and a session fell into my lap.

4 long weeks after the film's national release.

And with that, I now have seen the film and you're probably asking "how was it"; well sad to say that it's not terrible, mainly because of Douglas himself, he inhabits Gordon Gekko in the same way that James Earl Jones is the true voice of Darth Vader, sadly outside of him the film is predictable and at times fairly dull to watch, mainly because both of the family and finance stories don't mesh, in the first film the family story and the financial story meshed together into a cohesive whole, here that doesn't happen.

Another big problem is that unlike the first film, there is the lack of a strong villain, again in Wall Street 1 there was the Terence Stamp character as well as Gordon to rally behind, here Josh Brolin is fairly weak as is Shia, the centre of the film again just as Michael Cera was in Scott Pilgrim, he's a dead weight.

Overall, this is not a terrible sequel but it feels perfunctory and frankly, not worth your time and believe me, after waiting 4 long weeks to see it, I write it with a heavy heart, only a 2 out of 5 overall, money may never sleep but sometimes, people do.

Film Review - Rocky V (1990)

Rocky V is the fifth entry in the series and this time Rocky Balboa returns from Russia to find out his money is gone and his brain is damaged, with that he retires and reopens Mickey's old gym, but waiting for him there is a hungry young fighter named Tommy Gunn and a scrupulous Don King type promoter named George Washington Duke.

This movie, in all honesty is nothing but a complete and total disaster, everything here feels completely forced and while it wants to return to the heartfelt roots of the first two movies, heart is what's missing from this film and the Rocky series always ALWAYS works best when it has heart, personal drive and determination at its centre.

And that was in all of the previous four movies, in the first film the drive was for Rocky to escape his down and out life in the slums of Philadelphia, stand up and say "I am" with a proud standing within himself, in Rocky II it was the realisation that boxing is the only thing that gives his life meaning and that he cannot deny it any longer no matter how hard he tries, Rocky III the realisation that he's lost the "eye of the tiger" his edge and that he can only get it back from an old enemy and in Rocky IV it was doing it all for a friend.

But do we get any of that inspiration that makes those films work, no we don't, instead we get a hockey family melodrama and a pitiful attempt to close off the series which also failed even at those tasks.

In the end, skip this chapter as it's by far the worst of the series, heck even Stallone himself has since disowned this entry in the series and hey I can't blame him so points for that but again, don't watch this movie 0 out of 5.

Film Review - Rocky IV (1985)

Rocky IV is the fourth in the series starring Sylvester Stallone as Rocky, the Philadelphian Boxing Champion who this time faces off against Ivan Drago, a Russian boxer played by Dolph Lundgren, but after seeing Drago kill Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers) in the ring, the Italian Stallion wants to make this fight not only personal but also East vs. West.

You know, I actually had a lot of fun watching this movie, Stallone and the regulars are good as always but what struck me most here is the energy, the Rocky movies have always worked best when they have that energy and personal drive at their centre and here it's on show, despite the fact it feels like one of those movies where an action taken by a central character would avoid the main events but then again you wouldn't have a movie if that had actually happened now would you.

But hey, I ain't complaining about that as this was a fun and entertaining movie that was an improvement on Rocky III but not as good as Rocky II so a 3 out of 5.

Film Review - Rocky III (1982)

Rocky III is the third entry in this series and this time, a new champion emerges named Clubber Lang; the big screen debut of Mr. T but Rocky proves to be no match for him in the ring, but Apollo Creed comes calling again and tells him why he lost, he lost his edge otherwise called 'the eye of the Tiger' and he's got to get it back.

Rocky III is a more glossier picture than the first two which were more down to earth in their setting, here things seem brighter and better looking, the film is also brisker than the previous two films but the final bout here is nowhere near the brilliance of Rocky 2's final battle as it's over before it begins and Lang is not an effective villain, he's a loudmouth punk and as a result, you don't get any involvement in the payoff.

One thing I did enjoy though was the chemistry between Stallone and Weathers, the two play off each other very well but not even they can lift the film out of its overall mediocrity.

All in all, only for diehard Rocky fans, 2 out of 5.

A Look Back: Highlander and Highlander 2

Having not looked back for a while, I decided now was the time to do with the 1986 fantasy hit Highlander and it's 1991 sequel Highlander II.

Highlander starred Christopher Lambert as Connor MacLeod, who lives with his clan the Macleod's in the Scottish highlands, one day during a clan fight he receives a fatal stab wound but instead of dying he survives, banished from his home he learns from a man named Ramirez played by Sean Connery that he is immortal, destined to battle down the ages until only a few remain, where those who are left will fight for the Prize, which could spell doom if it falls into the wrong hands.

With all of that, you would expect a jumbled piece of filmmaking, right; wrong, Highlander works in every area, Australian Russel Mulcahy keeps a firm hold on the direction of the film while also bringing a strong editorial style to the piece, Lambert, Connery, Clancy Brown as the Kurgan the film's main villain and Roxanne Hart as Brenda the film's main love interest are solid here and perform very well, there's a very strong story regarding the nature of immortality, some great swordfights and of course, some kick ass songs contributed by the rock band Queen, as I said all of that adds up to a movie that simply worked.

If anything it worked a little too well for it's own good, and from here on there will be spoilers so read on at your own risk, the whole coda of the movie and the entire series is "There can be Only One" meaning that in the end, only one can remain before the Prize is given and that's exactly what happens at the end of the first movie, MacLeod kills the Kurgan and claims the Prize, meaning that there's now only one, doesn't leave a lot of room for a sequel let alone a franchise now does it.

Well, Producers William Panzer and Peter Davis decided to give it a shot, upon receiving pressure from the foreign distribution market they decided to make Highlander II, but unfortunately they failed miserably to make it work despite having a bigger budget, a big name cast with Lambert and Connery reprising their roles plus adding Virginia Madsen and Michael Ironside who were then enjoying some box office success and mainstream recognition plus Russel Mulcahy returning to the director's chair, but why did this film fail where the first film succeeded, especially with those elements listed above.

1. The Necessity of the Film Itself: My own principal reason as to why this film failed was that we didn't need it at all, the first Highlander movie ended things on the right note with there now being only one, why not leave it at that, so many sequels fail time and time again because they only exist because of the box office of the previous film demanding it and that's what happened here, the first film was a hit so the industry demanded a sequel within a certain amount of time, as a result fans don't get the sequel they deserve and the one they get makes some of them think "why did we need this movie at all".

2. The Script: The second reason H2 failed is the lack of a coherent script, because of the way the first film ended, there would have been enormous difficulty going forward on a sequel that could take place afterwards, a prequel could work easily, just show Connor in a different time period before the time of the Gathering, living under a false name like his Russell Nash identity the first film and also remembering what Ramirez taught him and fighting another immortal villain.

Interestingly enough Lambert did a movie called The Sicilian with Michael Cimino, something along those lines might have worked instead of the 25 years later story we got, even though the idea of the Shield protecting the Earth is a good one, mainly because it actually builds on what we learnt in the first film in terms of Connor and the Prize.

On top of that we also get a script that doesn't know what it wants to do with itself, trying to capture the new sci-fi setting as well as the mysticism of the first film when it should have been one or the other.

3. Revealing the Immortals Origin Story: This would be number 1 for most people but since I value a coherent script more, this is number 3 instead, in the first Highlander we knew nothing about how people became Immortal and it made for some interesting intrigue, this time around their origins are revealed as aliens from the planet Zeist, which was enough to make every Highlander fan seeing the film for the first time have a sour taste in their mouth, again a story idea that simply didn't work.

4. The Return of Ramirez: In one of the first film's most dramatic and exciting moments, Ramirez and the Kurgan face off, resulting in Ramirez being carved up 3 ways to Tuesday and losing his head, here through the Quickening, he's magically brought back to life and for no genuine purpose, even though Connery does a nice job and gives the film it's only source of comedy that works.

5. The Use of the Queen Songs: Again an insult to fans of the first film was the use of that films songs by Queen, both A Kind of Magic and Who Wants to Live Forever can be heard on the film's soundtrack and again it serves no purpose but to make you remember the first Highlander movie and how good that was, way to go guys, it's bad enough this sequel was insulting to begin with.

I could go on and I probably have for some people but you know, I'm a big fan of Highlander and I wanted to cover it in this kind of way, as for me the success of Highlander 1 led to the failure of Highlander 2 as all that film was to sum it up was pointless, incoherent and insulting to the fans who enjoyed Highlander 1 and yearned for a sequel despite the fact that we didn't really need one at all, perhaps in the end, There should have Been Only One.