Expendables 2 Review

Directed by Simon West and starring nearly every 80's action star imaginable including Sylvester Stallone, Jean-Claude Van Damme and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

 What makes a good film? Is it the immersive plot where audiences can escape the confines of reality  in order to indulge in a fictional (or non-fictional) wonderland , or maybe a great film is one that thrills to the exploits of the audience causing them to cry, laugh or cheer. A truly brilliant film is one that is able to achieve both these factors, in the case on the Expendables 2 it seems to have dismissed the plot, yet perfected the latter.

 Posing as an outright action film, with what seems as a lack of focus on anything but explosive violence,a poor plot is something to be expected of .Armed with a new recruit in the form of Liam Hemsworth  ,looking  more like a high-school heartthrob than a so called 'expendable', the team of veterans return for what should be an easy job, only to discover their plans going disastrously wrong. Leaving them with a bitter taste in there mouths. Straight from the off, before this story even begins to unfold, we are introduced to the team through a spectacular 15-minute action sequence, 'signposting' exactly what the audience is getting in for. From what seems to be from the mind of an 8 year old boy explaining his ambitious Christmas list, the opening sequence includes a ridiculous array of 'boys toys' from Aeroplanes to Hovercrafts. Of course all of this equipment appears spontaneously at the convenience of the team, as characters suddenly disappear and return 10 minutes later either on foot, in an aeroplane or as seen later in the film, in a gargantuan bulldozer. Thousands of poorly trained soldiers stand conveniently unprepared, simply waiting for a well choreographed fight scene to knock them out cold.

 This totally excessive, contrived opening scene paves the way for a whole feature film of preposterous occurrences, that are left in the dark with a lack of explanation. However from a film which clearly poses as a silly action flick, surely the story shouldn't be something to scrutinize? Although at times throughout the film, the dialogue and character persona's created for some scenes of laughable sincerity, it is pretty clear that this film did't take itself seriously. Perceived as a mockery/homage to 80's action film's embracing there over indulgent set pieces and laughable one-liners, maybe a little too much. Due to this film's utter ridiculousness, the audience soon learns to embrace these corny one-liners along with the nonsensical yet brilliantly choreographed action sequences. Still remaining however is this underlying plea for this film to be taken seriously, appearing especially from the character of Liam Hemsworth. As occurrences progress through the film and plot's are uncovered, a more sentimental side is seen, which is simply touched upon, then revisited at the conclusion in a pitiful 2 minute scene which the audience simply doesn't care about, because of the  flippant atmosphere that the film created.

The 'over the top' sinister head-splattering action, soon becomes laughable and is often followed by a magical one-liner, providing for a surprisingly successful comedic approach. However this doesn't excuse the poor screenplay within this film, no matter how many comedic lines are inserted, some solid dialogue is needed in order to move the story along. The problem lies with this cheesy dialogue. Whenever a serious sentence is strung together, it's nearly always followed by a cutting one-liner, which usually makes no sense at all! As the 'plot thickens' and intrigue sets in, this begins to get extremely frustrating.

 Quality of acting within this film can't truly be measured due to the stupidity of the screenplay, however some performances were worth noting. From a man who was once the center-piece of action, with his 'over-acting' and physical intimidation has now deteriorated into an ineffective source if laughter. Arnold Schwarzenegger lacks the evident screen presence he once possessed throughout his reign of 80's blockbusters. On the other hand his action counterpart, Chuck Norris, remains to posses the style he has always had, with the unfortunate lack of his expertise in martial arts.

The Expendables 2 is an action film for action fans, and rarely tries to be anything else. Embrace the absurd plot, the sickening action and the laughable one-liners. What more could you ask for from the greatest action heroes of all time?

60%- Fun fuelled, adrenaline pumping excitement...just don't go expecting a best picture nomination.

Calum Russell

Mini Carrie Review + Images of 2013 remake

Widely regarded as a horror classic the 1976 adaptation of Stephen Kings novel 'Carrie' earnt criticlal acclaim as well as a well deserved Oscar nomination for the outstanding Sissy Spacek. Unfortunately however 'Carrie' is the newest victim in Hollywood's remake book's, where Hollywood take there most coverted of classics and remake them for the 'modern audience' (a small minorety of people who seem incapable of sitting through a film without good CGI).

 Although this constant flow of remake's/reboot's is deeply frustrating and disheartening, I can do nothing to stop them, so I'm just going to have to grit my teeth, as I see a classic film being destroyed in 'glorious' 3-D.  Having watched Carrie recently, I can safely say that I really enjoyed it, I wouldn't quite describe it as a horror classic, however it certainly has touches of pure genius. The build-up is perfect, as we follow Carrie throughout her day, constantly being mocked by others around her, unaware of the power that she posses. Her mother (Piper Laurie) a christian radical, obsessed with keeping Carrie away from sin, provides an extremely uncomfortable performance, driving the story along, allowing Carrie to transform her persona and ultimately cause the destruction. The tension builds to a terrific level however, this tension doesn't translate into a sufficient length of sustainable coherent horror. Instead it just disappointingly fizzles out.  The film's main 'saving grace' is Sissy Spacek who not only looks visually terrifying, but also provides a convincing case  as the peculiar, oblivious girl Carrie. Something that Chloe Grace-Moretz will find hard to achieve.

 Don't get me wrong, I think Chloe Grace-Moretz is a fantastic actress especially considering her young age. Her performance in 2010's 'Kick-ass' was unpresidented for a child of her age, shouting profanities and decapitating drug dealers, with immense style and emotion it was difficult to comprehend that she was only 11. Here however, I think she is totally miscast and slightly 'out of her depth'.

 Take the recent image that was released of her in the role, remaking the pose that defines the original. Sinister? Not really. In comparison to  the exceptional Sissy Spacek, Chloe Grace-Moretz looks simply too young in this role, and therefore coincidently makes her character quite unbelieveable. Facial feature's still remain fairly child-like as apose to Spacek's adolescent figure, her physical height causing daunting intimidation, and her slim prominent facial features creating an unfamiler sense of discomfort that simply isn't achieved with Grace-Moretz.

The actress attempting to recreate the frighteningly dominating performance of Piper Laurie, falls to the responsibility of the highly regarded Juilianne Moore. While I have no doubt that she'll produce a satisfying performance, I do believe that without that mother figure poignantly performing, the fear that Carrie has of her mother won't be as realistic and sinister as it should be. Despite the lack of a dense wilderness of curly hair, Moore very much looks the part, displaying the innocent robes of Margaret White.

 Although I'm dreading this 2013 release, the original can be improved upon. While it may not be in the department of acting, there are certainly some story potholes that can be 'turfed over' in this remake. Chloe Grace-Moretz is a good enough actress to pull off the performance, however I highly doubt she could top the orginal Spacek performance. As long as the films important main ideas remain prominent, this film should be be satisfying enough not to be disappointing, after all they are following a tried and tested story. Just please don't display it in 3-D!

Calum Russell

The Blair Witch Project (1999) Review

Directed by Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez, The Blair Witch Project is a low-budget, found-footage horror film that follows the story of three students when they go missing in the woods of Maryland, a place haunted by the local legend,  The Blair Witch.

  With the horror sub-genre of found-footage being shoved into the limelight, an inevitable surge of half-hearted horror flicks have been dumped onto our cinema screens. Their lack of funding, care and attention have slowly turned this sub-genre into a joke, worthy of countless numbers of spoofs. When this is the case, one would ask, 'Then why do companies produce these film's' for which my answer would be: 1- The cost of production is so low, it's worth the risk, a profit will almost definitely be made and 2- They are essentially attempting to recreate the success of the highly acclaimed 'Blair Witch Project', from where found-footage became a phenomenon. Capitalising on the common, yet usually effective, convention of bringing an urban myth 'to life', The Blair Witch Project is a fine example of found-footage done right.

 'The 'Blair Witch', a daunting yet seemingly invisible enemy that claims  the lives (and sanity) of anyone that dares to enter her wooded domain. A totally original, highly terrifying and utterly convincing concept, created by the hands of two independent filmmakers. So convincing in fact, that at the time of release, audience's and critics alike, were unsure of it's legitimacy. This prominent thirst for originality is where the film truly excels. Initially presented as a 'mockumentory' in the form of a student-project, this linear story-line is essential to this films success. Knowing that this film's strength lies in the clever terror of the deceiving forest, the characters intelligently procrastinate in the safety of the village, gathering reported sightings from the all too realistic villagers, substantially increasing the tension as they enter the desolate forest. With our knowledge limited to the confines of the characters discoveries, we as the audience find ourselves in an all too relate able situation to the one on screen. We know just as much as they do about this paranormal witch, the terrain is just as disorientating to them as it is to us, and we want to escape this haunting 'nightmare' too.

 Subsequently these character's become all too realistic. The concept of being faced with such a situation, deeply disturbs even the most psychologically secured audience member's and therefore creates the mindset in order to heavily support these characters as they desperately search for escape. This total devotion to the characters involved, is mainly due to the fact that all three actors are completely unknown. Heather Donahue,  Joshua Leonard and Michael Williams each provide fantastic performances that allow the audience to become fully enthralled within their character. This feat of realism wouldn't be the same without these three actors.

 Despite the lack of funding, the total amount of effort that has been inserted into producing this film is undeniably outstanding. From the most obvious of directorial feats, to the tiny 'tit-bits' of filming, these two directors did as much as they could in order to produce an impeccable final product. To inject even more realism into the film, actors were given a simple script from which they were told to improvise, efforts go from actions as important as that, to almost trivia-type clever facts, like the use of the actual names of the actors for the characters within the film.

 Perhaps the only major problem I have with this film materialises at it's climax. The characters had been following a seemingly never ending trailer, haunted by the witch at night, causing paranoia to seep in. Just as we become completely engulfed within the film and we're on the edge of our seats frantically scrambling our brain for apossible outcome, the credits roll. Ah. Concluded among some as 'one of the best endings of all time', I couldn't help but feel left wanting more. It was disappointing to see the tension in the film increasing to an unbearable stage, for it to just vanish in an anti-climactic lazy ending. The ending just about suffices , making sense and providing a fairly clever outcome that revisits knowledge gained previously in the film. However it is very abrupt and sudden, unable to provide a visible outcome to the characters. Usually such an ending would be brilliant, piecing together the story for yourself, however to allow for such an ending an adequate amount of information must be given beforehand, this lack of information coincidentally leaves you underwhelmed.

 The Blair Witch Project has totally transformed the way found-footage film's are perceived , it's clever, terrifying, original and relate-able, it's just unfortunate that no subsequent found-footage film's has been able to replicate such an achievement.

 80%- Ripping up the conventions of horror and painting on a fresh canvas with the colours of originality, very intelligent and very scary.

Calum Russell

The Bourne Legacy Review

Directed by Tony Gilroy and starring Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz and Edward Norton, The Bourne Legacy follows the story of Aaron Cross (Renner) a new CIA agent whose stakes have been triggered by the repercussions of Jason Bourne's actions.

 Highly acclaimed as one of the best trilogies of all time, The Bourne series has provided it's own unique stamp on the action genre, with a more realistic, gritty take on spy-espionage. Together, Damon and Paul Greengrass (Director of Supremacy and Ultimatum) became an unstoppable team, adapting Robert Ludlums last two novels into not only box-office sensations but also film's worthy of the critic's 'good books'. Which is why it came as a surprise to see that a forth instalment was on it's way, spoiling the trilogy. Milking the cash cow or continuing the franchises highly credited legacy? Which ever way this film is perceived, it certainly had a mountain to climb, attempting to match the standards of the blockbuster behemoth, The Bourne Ultimatum. Yet while this film doesn't quite match  the success of it's predecessor's, it's still a fairly enjoyable action film.

 A complex story-line filled with plenty of sub-plots and complicated blueprints, has become something to be expected of from the Bourne series, and this film very much follows in the trend. Continuing a sub-plot left intelligently unexplored from The Bourne Identity. Delving deep into the story behind the science, theories and manufacture of the futuristic pills, giving the user enhanced abilities. A sub-plot which should have been left in a shroud of mystery. Frequently stumbling over itself, this subject matter proves to over-complicate the film, providing for a total mess of a story, which will require a lot of brain power to decipher. The film relies too heavily on it's predecessors to carry the story, the constant mentions of 'Jason Bourne' throughout the film, quickly became boring, as the audience attempted to close the door on that separate 'saga' yet the film refusing to let it go. This coincidentally, leads to the inevitable reliance on the hope that every audience member have not only seen the three previous films, but fairly deeply analysed them .The intention to create an original story is clearly there, however this inadvertently leads to  plot overload, with simply too many idea's being inserted into the film. These plots can be pieced together if your knowledge of the series is fresh, and your in the mood to heavily concentrate on the political, scientific 'gobeldigook' that is being discussed in front of your eyes. Almost as if each page of the plot had been ripped out and carelessly hurled over the table, jumbling the story completely, leaving the audience to 'put the pieces back together again'.

 The ham-handed plot, is also frequently hindered by the overly-complicated dialogue. Audience members are expected to have studied the scientific theorems behind muscular and neurological enhancement. Yet these sub-plots don't actually go anywhere most are simply forgotten about. However the cog's are still turning in our brains as we, the audience, attempt to decode the previous, pointless section of preposterous dialogue ;detracting us from the story unveiling in front of us, making way for further bewilderment. However if this thick layer of nonsense is peeled back, underneath (despite it's linear properties) is really quite a simple story-line that can be followed with ease. In an attempt to make this film scientifically, and politically accurate they have totally confused themselves.

  For a film which poses very much as a blockbuster action film, the action is really quite scarce. Seeing nothing in terms of hand-to-hand combat, or spectacular gunfight's until a good hour into the film. Although the action maybe lacking, The Bourne Legacy proves to be as good as it's predecessors in the action department, providing some excellent scenes of suspense. Contrary to many action films, this film nailed the pacing of the fight scenes perfectly, technique and injury was visible, allowing the audience to share in the pain of the victim. The most poignant of action scenes appears towards the end, in the form of a motorbike chase sequence which is visually stunning despite it's unnecessary length.

 Filling the shoes of the intelligent, yet physically daunting presence of Matt Damon, was never going to be easy. Yet I believe that Jeremy Renner did the best job possible, matching the physical finesse of Damon in the action sequences, even if he wasn't as convincing on the intelligent CIA agent aspect. Although Rachel Weisz's character may do nothing in terms of the story, not even in terms of possible love interest, she still provides a good performance. Edward Norton was also very good, however I never really felt the power of his government force, never being quite as desperate as they needed to be.

Overall due to incoherent story-telling and inconsistent sub-plot's, The Bourne Legacy proves to be the most petty of the series. From the slow pacing problem of the first hour, to the anti-climactic abrupt ending, this film may disappoint the avid fan.

50%- The scenes of action should keep you stimulated, but the heavy-handed story-telling may produce a yawn.

Calum Russell

Oceans 11-13 DVD Review

After the surprise acclaim of 'Magic Mike' earlier in the year, I've felt a sudden urge to uncover Steven Soderbergh's remaining filmography. From the award winning 'Erin Brockovich to his coveted Oceans trilogy, hoping that I would extract just as much enjoyment from them, as I received from his 2012 release.

*****REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS*****

Oceans 11 is, of course, directed by Steven Soderbergh and contains a star-studded cast consisting of Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Matt Damon and Casey Affleck, to name just a few. The story follows a group of 11 elaborate characters, led by George Clooney, as they plan to rob three Las-Vegas casinos simultaneously. An intriguing premise with the potential to produce an intriguing story to match, in twined with some thrilling scenes of audacious escapism, and for the most part this film lives up to my initial hopes. Delving immediately into the story, introduced to the main character as he assembles his team of criminals, each trained in a specific field of expertise, all a little to eager to be part of the team. You would think that as the ringleader, Danny Ocean (Clooney) asked the various characters to be part of the team that some may decline and say, No...that's illegal. Yet no apparently, 'everyones a criminal' as they are more than willing to take part in this scheme. As we are introduced to each character through an inevitable montage, our excitement increasingly builds and builds, as our minds excavate all the possible routes this film could take. Then almost too realistically, the film grinds to a halt, as they think and re-think the plan. With the film beginning so suddenly and personally, rushing through character development with a speedy montage, this sudden change in pacing is very prominent and leaves you in a state of disinterest, until the plan kicks into action.

 Spurred by the desire to 'steal' his wife back from the grips of a greedy casino owner, and of course in the hope of stealing billions of dollars  ,Danny Ocean  and 'co.'  set off to perform the criminal deed. However although we know the motives behind this selfish attack, we never really fully believe them. If you actually think about the motives their really quite petty. Clooney wants his wife back, OK, just settle it with a civilised conversation with Mr Garcia! A full-scale extraction of the entire earnings of Clooneys enemy, is really quite nonsensical. Despite this the team carry out the ambitious robbery, which actually becomes very exciting to watch, the intriguing design behind their plan becomes very complex yet thrilling, as an explanation of the previous part of the scheme is explained, I felt my face light up with enjoyment as my brain took a rest for a minute or two. Yes, sections of the plan are totally ridiculous and silly, but it fits in with the tone of the film, set in stone by the previous 45 minutes.

 As this looming sense of superior achievement becomes prominent towards the end of the film, I couldn't help but think of an underlying twist in tale, that I thought would inevitably come and foil there plans...but it didn't. Everything turns out to be just a little to contrived for my liking everything goes too well, in fact nothing goes wrong, this however is only a minor irritation (for now!). As the eleven 'heroes' bathe in their success, you can't help but feel just a little bit sorry for Andy Garcia's character (Terry Benedict), after all in our eyes he's simply an innocent man who's created a respectable business empire for himself. He's not actually made out to be a bad guy at all, more a pleasant gentleman...that were supposed to despise?

 Overall I liked Oceans 11 it's ridiculous and elaborate plans had me smiling throughout, it's a heist film with dose of realism splashed on.

**********

Oceans twelve however, is just a completely different ball game, directed by the one and only, and sees the original cast returning, with the new addition of Julia Roberts to the 'gang'. This installment continues soon after the occurrences of the previous film, Mr Benedict wants revenge, but the gang have spent all their 'winnings'.

After my liking for Oceans 11, I was hoping that I was on course for the one of the best trilogies of our time, the story was fresh, the plans were exciting, the characters were interesting, but I had forgotten the story (at times) was also preposterous. Oceans 12 is not only the worst film in the trilogy, but also one of the worst films of all time.

 Beginning the film in the eyes of Terry Benedict as he hunts down his bitter enemy Danny Ocean and his team. Somehow he is able to track each character down in a matter of hours (or so it seems), knowing where each of them works, sleeps and goes for a social gathering. Following in the same pattern of the first, this opening rushes along in a matter of minutes due to a snazzy yet horribly unnecessary montage. Due to it's fast pace, before we know it, the gang are back together after years apart, about to embark on an ambitious heist in order to retrieve back the money they stole from that very nice gentleman in the first film...joy. So off they set for Europe, planning to steal from a further 3 casinos. However as the plan starts to unfold, so does a coinciding sub-plot, following the 'Night Fox' (aka Vincent Cassel) a master criminal, one step ahead of the 12 protagonist's. Hunting him down is Catherine Zita-Jones an oddly desperate police officer, who throws an unlikely spanner in the works. Initially I was thrilled to see a twist in the tale, something that was solemnly missed from the previous film. As the plot progressed however I was disappointed to see that this 'twist' was almost pointless, as of course the 'heros' come out on top, without a worry in the world.

 It is however how they came to succeeding in there plans that the film simply falls apart. Due to certain spontaneous set-backs, half the team find themselves 'out of the game' with only a handful still available. For a moment I was racking my brain searching for a possible outcome for this film, but of course they find a way. By calling up a previously unavailable Julia Roberts, a truly awful plan unravels itself, which includes the unexpected feature of Bruce Willis. The plan involves, using Julia Roberts to infiltrate the building in order for the team to steal their required item, OK seems believe able enough. However to walk through the front door of the building, Julia Roberts must be disguised, as who? I hear you ask...as none other than.......Julia Roberts! Sorry, what. Yes that was my reaction also, Julia Roberts infiltrates the building as Julia Roberts as what can only be described as one of the most whimsical, bizarre and pointless scenes of film-making that I have ever seen. As for Bruce Willis, don't even get me started. He's totally necessary, and is simply added into the film, so that his fans of his can express their love for him by saying 'OMG it's Bruce Willis'. Still, however awful this may be, this still doesn't explain how the plan comes to a conclusion. Instead of completing their goals simply, or even failing in their attempts, there HAS to be an elaborate escape, which in this film involves the use of Damon's characters parents...duh!

 The Night Fox sub-plot was a fantastic idea, executed poorly, and ultimately ends in what only can be described as the worst heist, dance number ever performed on screen, and by no fault of his, It's performed by Vincent Cassel.

 This is a boring, absurd and totally contrived piece of film making that I hoped would be corrected by it's predecessor Oceans 13.

**********

Directed by, Yep you guessed it, Steven Soderbergh and starring the old gang in there entirety, with one new addition. Oceans 13 follows our favourite robbers, and after one of them is double-crossed, there all out for revenge.

 After the despicable Oceans 12, my expectations were rock bottom, I was simply hoping for a thrilling,fun film, after my hopes of a brilliant trilogy were obliterated. Thankfully, although this film may not be as good, it still shows glimpses of the original hit, being snappy, clever, funny yet oh so absurd.

 Contrary to the previous films, in Oceans 13 the gang set to (in a sense) in-directly bring down a corporate mastermind, by simply rigging machines and committing crimes of a similar nature. This change is fitting and very refreshing after two films that followed the same path. This film also presents a more comedic approach with the teams twin drivers taking the helm with the humour. Throughout the two films the twins (Cassey, Caan) have been my favourite characters, witty, charming, yet willing to do the job .I was disappointed to see that after hours of screen time, we remain to know as little about them as we did in the original. This is actually a prominent annoyance among the entire cast from the right hand man Rusty Ryan (Pitt) to the mechanical expert 'Basher Tarr' (Cheadle). We only know the bare minimum about every character, maybe if more focus was given on character development, I would have been a lot more engaged with the characters, and would coincidentally enjoy the film more.

 Along with the fresh view of the concept however comes a fresh view of the plan, and the way it's carried out. Presenting  a much more complex and ridiculous 'blueprint' than ever before. This would have been great, if it wasn't for the totally incoherent angle in which this plan is explained. In fact they hardly even explained it, they expect you be as knowledgeable as the characters displayed, knowing what all these devices and wires are. Despite the overshadowing complexity, this film follows in the footsteps of 11 in the sense that the plan is absurd, but when you find out how it's done, everyone goes 'ahh so that's how they did it' and everyone leaves a happy customer.

 Acting throughout each film in the series is standard, with standout performances appearing from Cassey Afleck, Matt Damon and Al Pacino. The remaining cast simply glide along each film, with standard acting representing the same character every time, with identical emotions and aesthetic properties. Al Pacino performs how Andy Garcia should have in Oceans 11, portraying an evil, selfish businessman, who you really want to see failing, and of course you do in terrific, satisfying style.

 An unfortunate similarity however is the ultimate conclusion of success at the end of every installment, including this one. As the last in the trilogy, you may expect even a slight 'hiccup' in their plan, but no, everything runs all too smoothly, which was foreseeable from the very beginning. Every film is laid out the same way and follows exactly the same road, in a sense once you've seen one, you've seen them all. Oceans 13 tries to change the films course with the return of Vincent Cassel. Although I admire there intentions, the return of this character is totally unnecessary, and actually laughable after he only receives a screen time of a matter of minutes.

***********

Overall the Oceans series is certainly not one to be ashamed of, however it is neither one to be magnificently proud of. Displaying the same story across the course of the three films, and receiving the same outcome each time. The elaborate and fun heist scenes should leave you satisfied, but the absence of so much, will leave you wanting more.

60%- Enjoy the thrilling, excitement of 11, skip the atrocious comedic value of 12, then conclude your viewing with the complex, yet humorous value of 13.

Calum Russell

Prom Night 2008 (DVD Review)

Directed by Nelson McCormick and starring Brittany Snow and Idris Elba, Prom Night is a remake of the thriller from 1980 which follows the story of Donna (Snow) on the day of her senior prom, though a sadistic killer from her past has other plans for her night.

The horror genre is possibly the hardest genre to get right, however there is simply no excuse or this monstrosity of a film. This film offers nothing new, no new concepts, no new characters, no original screenplay, NOTHING! This film offers NOTHING! It did however supply plenty of negatives.

The first of which comes from the story. This film glides along a bed of clichés, offering nothing new, which means that every step of the story can be easily predicted from the opening minutes of the film! All the classic clichés are on display, most prominently being the 'killer in the mirror' which is just murdered throughout the film, as it's used way too frequently. However my favourite of the clichés has to come from the chase scene, where the victim is being chased and decides it would be a great idea to wonder down the maintenance corridor instead of going down into the bustling lobby! This coincidentally provides for one of the most boring films I've ever seen, for its relatively short 88 minute's running time, the film seems to drag and drag due to the un-original characters and linear story-line. The film seemed to be following almost a clear template of what was on the 'schedule': someone goes to their bedroom, and see's the killer, someone goes looking for the previous person and see's the killer, this goes on and on and just gets so repetitive. As well as the obvious, horror story-line you've also got this underlying plot of prom king and queen which never really comes to a conclusion and you never really know why they included this aspect. It was like they were undecided on what genre to go for, chick flick or horror slasher, in the end it just merged into one gloppy mess, that completely failed to gel.

The second negative comes from the use of the cliché horror characters. The Jock, the scared protagonist, the trusty boyfriend, their all here for you to enjoy, however instead of playing these stereotypes off as a joke, which some films are trying to do, to achieve a comedic twist, Prom night decides that it wants to take these characters seriously. This creates some really awful and terribly predictable scenes in which you can literally guess what the persons going to say next!

The third of many problems in this film, lies within the screenplay department. This is somewhat inevitable as, what comes with a terrible story-line and clichéd characters is a truly laughable screenplay to match. Some lines in this film are appalling (and sticking the the theme) clichéd! It got to the point where the film was no longer funny, it literally annoyed me just how predictable it was, delivering the well-known lines like 'Has anyone seen Jason?' or 'Hello, is anyone here, this isn't funny anymore'..... Awful.

These are just 3 of the many faults that this film has; however there is one more minor fault that simply can't go unmentioned. As I said earlier in my review, the film couldn't decide whether it was a chick-flick or a horror slasher, the music in this film points out my problem perfectly. The film begins with a mix of low bass and 80's pop, I had to do a double take of the DVD cover to confirm that I was watching the right film; from then on the same problem occurs again throughout the film, theirs a scene of dark horror then a smooth transition to calming pop music!

The film is truly dire, conveying pretty much everything I hate about film all into 88 minutes, in a way is a weird achievement! The ONLY positive I can think of about this film, is that it's so bad it's actually laughable. If you’re looking for a laughably bad film to entertain you and your mates, this might suffice, however if you’re looking for a serious horror, that will keep you on the edge of your seat, stay well clear.

10%- An abomination of a film, predictable, boring and hilariously bad.

Calum . Russell

Ted Review

Directed by Seth Mcfarlane and starring Mark Whalberg and Mila Kunis, Ted follows the story of John Bennett, who as a result of a childhood wish has a lifelong friend in the form of a talking, drinking bear.

After exploding with the worldwide success of the t.v comedy 'Family Guy' Seth Mcfarlane, the creator, is now looking to hit the big screen, with his film debut. Despite never truly understanding the comedy appeal behind 'Family Guy' or Mcfarlane's subsequent series' for that matter, I felt that there was something more with Ted, and as this was his debut film, I wanted to give his humor another chance, in the hope that Ted would ignite my love for his work. Contrary to my initial thoughts, Ted actually supplies something that I never thought it would, a loving story of two inseparable friends who are faced with the realism of life and relationships. However, as much as I searched, one thing that was incredibly scarce within this film, was a sense of comedic flare.

It seems as though I will never understand the 'genius' behind 'Family Guy' as the comedy within Ted is almost (understandably) identical. Which basically means, none of the jokes make any sense, and you're simply meant to laugh at the concept of the joke rather than the actual joke itself. For example prominent across nearly all of Mcfarlene's comedy empire, is a cartoon version of a person or animal committing superficial acts, a baby which can talk, a bear who goes to work and now a cuddly toy who smokes, drinks and is deemed acceptable within society. This running joke, across all of the series is only funny for a good few minutes, until you accept the character for what they are. I also have a problem with the puerile nature behind the humour, which is cheap, lazy and totally un-funny. Frequent jokes about 'farting', were totally immature and distasteful and as the film progressed, the quality behind every joke just deteriorated.

One type of humor which will never cease to frustrate me, is the use of humour surrounding pop culture. Endless jokes about unpopular stars like 'Justin Bieber' are used too much in this film. I don't think I'll ever find them funny simply because it's an easy way to make people laugh, by taking a dig at someone, then simply adding a 'swear word' at the end. In addition to this, these jokes are 'time-bombed', in a matter of years these jokes will become irrelevant and totally confusing. For this simple fact, this film will not 'stand the test of time'.

As previously mentioned I found the story to be weirdly heart-warming...initially. As I was clinging on to all the positivity I had within this film, the story slipped from my grasp, spiked with a predictable plot, clichéd events, and an oh so whimsical ending. Due to its strong start it was disappointing to see it deteriorate in such a way, even from a comedy standpoint the film began well. With the majority of memorable jokes appearing in the opening, there are a handful of jokes which will make you laugh, there just aren't enough to make this a strong definitive comedy. Plot points feel forced and contrived with unnecessary cameos appearing out of nowhere, the introduction of Giovanni Ribisi is simply a method of continuing the sloppy plot, in order to supply yet another dose of immature humour.

I began to build up a lot of respect for Mark Whalberg ever since 'The Other Guys' back in 2010, whilst it may not have been the best comedy, it still showed that Whalberg is a diverse actor who's not embarrassed to step outside his comfort zone in fear of under-performing. Furthermore he was actually very funny in the role, standing up to the comedy behemoth Will Ferrell .Similarly in 'Ted' I found him to be very funny, and actually funnier than the comedic spectacle in this film that is Ted himself. Also included within this film is a plethora of comedy faces, often seen as 'sub-characters' in various other films, some very funny cast members, let down by a poor script and childish humour. Mila Kunis is as good as she could within this restraining role, she doesn't really have the freedom to express any qualities, she's simply confined to the character of 'Lori' the loving girlfriend. As for the main comedy centrepiece 'Ted' voiced by the one and only Seth Mcfarlane? I couldn't help but picture Peter Griffin every time he spoke, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I personally find his voice quite irritating but I think that the fact that his voice was familiar to fans made it all the more funny.

Overall, Ted wasn't awful; it had its moments of hilarity, but also had long periods of painful humour. This wasn't aided by It's awful plot. However I have to appreciate that I'm not a fan of his work so I'm not surprised I didn't like it. As for fans of Family Guy, you should love this film, as it's simply more of the same 'hilarity'.

50%- Low quality comedy, coinciding with the clichéd plot, makes for an up-happy Ted.

Calum Russell

Trailer Talk- Paranormal activity 4

Paranormal Activity 4 trailer- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89PboIQlu1c

What began as a clever, intuitive, low-budget horror film has now evidently descended into tasteless b-movie rubbish. However despite my increasing disinterest within the franchise, I am still intending to watch this when it's released around Halloween time. Why? Well It might not do anything for me in the scares department, but in terms of a interesting story I'm weirdly hooked . Despite my dislike for nearly every release in the series, the story that these film's are slowly stringing together is enough for me to be mildly excited. The continuing tale within the franchise may be boring and long-winded, but if you dissect each film for information, a  fairly simple yet solid story can be recovered from the rubble.

 The scares however are another story. Cheap jump scares that are bound to make you jump no matter the situation, are striking throughout every film , and it looks like the trend will continue with this 4th installment. There is one technique however that is used within the franchise, yet is rarely used to similar effect outside the series. The technique to linger the shot for a disconcerting amount of time, yet scarcely ever actually reveal anything. Ignoring this hint of brilliance, every other scare is lazy and completely 'murdered' until it's simply not scary any more.

 One thing that is both prominently positive and negative throughout the franchise, is the use of unknown actors. Positive in the fact that, whenever unknown actors are used, a huge dose of realism in injected immediately into the film. Negative in the fact that, an unknown actor doesn't necessarily translate into a good actor, this is clearly evident from the atrocious acting displayed in the trailer.

 My fear from this trailer, is that this new 'episode' in the series looks more like a route down the' teenage horror- flick' path. Due to the result of the previous two films this franchise could soon be one destined for the 'bargain-bucket'.