Ratter Reviews

I Am Number Four (2011)

Better than expected, just don't expect much

[6/10 · 25 August 2013]

The track record for film adaptations of young adult books is pretty abysmal, with only a few actually achieving both a decent representation of the source material and providing an enjoyable experience, therefore you would be quite right to watch 'I Am Number Four' (from the book by Pittacus Lore) with some heavy scepticism about you. But in the end, going in with the distinct notion that I wouldn't enjoy it, actually resulted in the complete opposite. It's not exactly a great movie - far from it - but I actually had fun watching it.

As far as the plot goes, it's pretty much as you'd expect. Guy with super powers falls in love when you expect him to, gets in trouble when you expect him to, mentor dies when you expect him to etc. I didn't expect to get blown away by the story but it did the job and it did it well enough. What's more is that there are enough "witty" moments to at least make the experience a little more bearable.

The acting was pretty mediocre which for a movie like this actually worked in it's favour. Sure Pettyfer is as wooden as ever but it kind of suits the character he's playing (someone not from this world). Olyphant played his role much like with Givens or Bullock, in that he just scowls and grunts his way through the lines (obviously having fun with it) and pretty much steals ever scene he's in. Teresa Palmer also manages to make her highly annoying character watchable thanks to some bad one-liners delivered with her irresistible Australian accent. Plus there's a puppy.

The special effects (barring the alien creatures) actually proved surprisingly effective. Most of it is just vibrantly coloured plasma bolts from the various weapons but they did a good job of absorbing you into the action. Even the physically illogical acrobatics that go on were well choreographed and it was hard to tell what was stunt work and what was visual effects.

In the end I had fun with the movie, a lot more than I ever expected to. The first half runs slow and the second goes completely off the rails with action only to end rather anti-climatically, but it still manages to be fun if you let it.

Superhero Movie (2008)

It's pretty bad but not terrible

[4/10 · 23 November 2012]

*Disclaimer: the only reason I watched the film was for Leslie Nielsen. The man is a comedy God and is automatically funny in anything he is in.

Superhero Movie, while by no means the worst spoof movie ever made, is still pretty dreadful. It relies far too much on cheap slapstick humour and fart jokes which is a shame as the actual spoof part of the movie had a lot of potential to it, particularly the ending which even managed to achieve some interesting plot elements. There were even a few moments that reminded me of the comedy gold that was Airplane! and the Naked Gun series (although that could have been because the gags were lifted straight from them). In the end though I was more bored than entertained and felt the film dragged on for too long (despite the short runtime of only 70min).

I was surprised to see quite a few familiar faces pop up in the movie (Jeffrey Tambor and Kurt Fuller to name a few) and they did a good job of providing some much needed laughs. The main highlight however, as mentioned above, was the comedy wonder-gem that is Mr Nielsen. Don't get me wrong, the material he's given is terrible, but his delivery is so perfect that it gave me an excuse to keep watching. In fact, I would argue that his inclusion alone makes it a film worth watching. I should also mention that Christopher McDonald also plays his part well and is actually a pretty good counter-part to Willem Dafoe's Norman Osborne character from Spiderman.

In the end however you are left with a film that has a few chuckles here and there but mostly groans of despair throughout. Stay for Uncle Albert but otherwise seek your laughs elsewhere.

The Science of Sleep (2006)

A unique gem of a film

[7/10 · 27 February 2011]

Despite the Kaufman-free involvement, Gondry's follow-up to 'Eternal Sunshine' is as much a bizarre a specimen as it's predecessor, however just not as complex.

The plot itself is nothing too special (young man moves back home to be with his newly widowed mother and falls in love with his neighbour), however it's the complex nature of Stéphane's personality and his inability to often distinguish real life from his dreams that make this film a must to watch.

García Bernal is perfectly cast as Stéphane and and is able to keep us rooting for him, even when the character becomes selfish and even slightly unpleasant. Gainsbourg also holds extremely well as the love interest and it does raise the question as to why we don't see her in many other mainstream films (although to call the film mainstream may be slightly pushing it). The supporting cast also do a great job at helping us immerse into Stéphane's world, particularly Chabat's Guy, who's sex-obsessed eccentric almost steals the film at times.

But the real strength of the film comes from Gondry himself who's creativity has reached a new high. Stéphane's dream sequences stand out beautifully well through their use of stop-motion animation and cheap sets made from random objects, while his normal life is still full of wonderfully bizarre contraptions that seamlessly merge with his imagination. Even the little things stand out.

Despite being marketed as a comedy, I did find myself questioning this throughout the movie, particularly towards the end. While there is plenty of humour throughout, the film ultimately feels tragic because Stéphane is having this trouble in distinguishing what is real and what is his dream and a result he is unable to take life seriously enough. But again, this just shows how good a movie this was.

Overall this is a unique treat of a movie that will surprise many people with it's inventiveness and heart.

Inception (2010)

Simply incredible

[9/10 · 20 August 2010]

How does one go about reviewing a film like Inception without giving anything away? Ideally you can't but no matter how much you know, or think you know, nothing can prepare you for what you are about to experience. That being said the less you know, the more rewarding it can be.

Inception is one of the very few exceptions to the summer Blockbuster where the intelligence of it ranks as high as the action. Sure, you won't have you're life changed by it, but you'll certainly have something to talk about afterwards. Like many of his previous films, Inception can be understood on a single viewing, but to understand the real motivation behind it and see between all the layers does mean extra viewings.

I know that many people have criticised the film claiming it wants to make you feel dumb or that it want to be complex, however that is not the case. The film is relatively linear in narrative, with only a few flashbacks scenes that act as necessary exposition on DiCaprio's character. I will say though that the film can become complicated, not because it wants to be but because it has to be. The idea behind the multiple levels of dreaming can be hard to understand at first, but this doesn't necessarily deter you from the actual film. Other than this, by simply paying attention the film should remain simple on the surface and allow you to enjoy it without feeling lost. It's only if you scratch deeper that you unleash Nolan's true power of narrative and you realise how intricate each part of the film is and how vital its role is.

The acting itself is exceptional with no one pulling you out of the experience. DiCaprio gives his best, and it shows. Gordon-Levitt is brilliant and is responsible for the film's most memorable set-piece. Hardy's Eames adds some of the blink-and-you'll-miss-them witty remarks that provide some mild comic relief. The dialogue itself works well in the film and it's obvious that care was taken when the scripting was done.

In turns of visually, Inception seems to hit every mark. The cinematography is stunningly gorgeous, no matter what the situation is and the use of IMAX cameras gives the impression that Nolan really wants us to see the bigger picture, which we do. The special effects are nothing short of mind-blowing. Nolan, who isn't keen on CGI, obviously cares that what few scenes should feature it they have to be flawless. The most eye-popping scene, and the one which will forever stay with me, features Gordon-Levitt's Arthur fighting it out in a corridor while bouncing all over the place. While this doesn't sound like much, in the context of the film it is a flawless piece of stunt work that is just amazing to watch. Even knowing how it was done it is still fascinating to watch the scene play out and marvel at how authentic it feels.

In short Inception is a movie that you have to see.

The Extraordinary Adventures of Adèle Blanc-Sec (2010)

An enjoyable film

[7/10 · 24 April 2010]

Having been lucky to find it was showing at the cinema, I must admit I jumped at the chance to see it being a fan of Luc Besson. I didn't really know what to expect (having only seen trailers for the movie) and I never read the original stories, however I was pleasantly surprised.

Overall the film was very funny and had some very good set pieces, including a very enjoyable scene in Egypt and a scene in a Parisian prison that reminded me of the slapstick nature of the original "Pink Panthers". Louise Bourgoin was very good as the titular heroine and was able to pull off both charm and dead-pan humour effectively throughout the film, making her a pleasure to watch.

However I must admit that at times the plot did wear thin at places and I would be lying if I didn't say that the story itself was very silly. At times it felt as though I was watching a cross between "The Mummy Returns" and "The Crystal Skull" (although this movie is a far superior specimen) while at other times the film reverted to a more serious adventure tone, unable to properly balance the two tones.

All in all I enjoyed the film and would happily see it again. If you are the sort of person who enjoyed "Sahara" and "National Treasure" then this film is for you. On the other hand fans of the more refined explorer films such as "Raiders" might find little to relate to. That being said I do hope for is that the film will be successful enough to merit a sequel, even if the ending does leave it on a rather pointless cliffhanger.

Starship Troopers (1997)

Everything a Sci-Fi film could need

[8/10 · 10 November 2007]

Starship Troopers is one of those rare movies that you know is rubbish but you just can't help watching over and over again because it is enjoyable, which is essentially the whole purpose of watching a film. The plot is fairly basic, which is good as films like this risk becoming boring or too complicated if they try to be too intelligent. This being said however, the film weaves in a bit of political satire and romance as well as the core component of 'man vs alien-bug war'.

The film itself is well made and like Robocop, features news updates during the film to keep the viewer up to date with the Trooper universe. Two sequences worth pointing out would have to be the Klendathu drop and the siege at the outpost, which as far as action sequences go are near the top of my list with the likes of the beach assault scene from Apocalypse Now.

Despite the B-Movie cast, the actors really help add to the film, even if their acting is a bit wooden at times. The two actors who stand out in their performances are Clancy Brown and Michael Ironside who help to keep the feeling that the film is more than just a B-Movie.

If the acting or plot doesn't convince you then the CGI should. For a film made in 1997, the special effects are something not to be sneered at. I've seen plenty of more modern films where the CGI was nothing compared to that of the film.

To top it all up is the kick-ass score that was composed by the legendary Basil Poledouris, which is in my opinion one of the best pieces of music ever to accompany a film. This is ideally a traditional Verhoeven sci-fi film. Like Robocop and Total Recall, it features graphic violence and partial nudity, which although one may find unnecessary, it makes it a perfect choice for a Friday night in. Any Verhoeven or sci-fi fan would be stupid not to give Starship Troopers a try.

Casino Royale (2006)

Good, but lacking...

[6/10 · 25 November 2006]

Before I start I would like to make clear that although I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, I just felt that something lacked from it.

The film had everything that a James Bond film should have. Action, drama, humour and a James Bond who can act the part properly. Daniel Craig is without any doubt the best James Bond role model since Sean Connery, but in terms of portrayal, is even better.

The only criticism I feel this film should get is about the music. The title music I felt was terrible. Previous James Bond scores have always somehow suited the film, but for some reason this time it didn't. The second criticism is summed up in three words; 'James Bond Theme'. Nowhere throughout the movie (apart from the credits) is the famous John Barry film score used. There are numerous scenes (which I will leave anonymous to prevent spoilers) where this music would have heightened the excitement and improved the scene to such an extent where the film becomes better too.

I remember reading somewhere that Quentin Tarintino had originally shown interest in directing the film and I wonder whether the film would have been better had he been selected. Although I have nothing against Martin Campbell, who I thought did a superb job with the film, I feel that Tarintino would have used his visionary talents well and created the perfect Bond universe.

The Wicker Man (2006)

Should be burned

[3/10 · 3 September 2006]

What a pointless waste of perfectly good money. Possibly one of the worst remakes I ever saw, this film shows hardly any new imagination, despite the cast changing to American. I do not criticise people who have seen and enjoyed this movie. Everybody has a different taste in film and this is only one opinion.

One of the first failings it undertook was the fact that a remake cannot be made if the original is a cult classic. It is only a reason for Hollywood to show that they want to ruin a perfectly good film because they had no part in it being made.

The second failing was if they were not going to change the plot, to give it a slightly different twist and to make it 'new', what point is there on watching it. People who have seen the original won't have anything to look forward to.

My advice is, watch the original. Enjoy the original. Then if you are feeling bored, daring and got two hours to kill, see the remake.