Interview with Tyler Crawford - Aged 10 - after watching Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part I

(DC) What is your name?

(TC) Tyler Crawford.

How old are you?

I’m 10 and I’m in year 6.

What is your favourite Harry Potter film so far?

The Chamber of Secrets. I loved the end when he killed the book with that snake tooth.

So, what did you think of the film?

I thought it was 5 out of 5!

Why did you like it so much?

I liked it because it was a really adventurous film and because at some moments it was really scary!

Anything else?

I liked the bit where they told the story of the three brothers (the story explaining the existence of the Deathly Hallows). It was a good story. I don’t think it would have been that good if I had of read it but because I could actually see it, it made it a lot better. The animation was really cool!

What didn’t you like?

I didn’t think it was that funny. I laughed once or twice, but it wasn;t that funny. Other people might find it hilarious, but not me.

What was your favourite part of the film?

The part with the three brothers?

Really?!

Nah, nah, nah…my best part was the snake fight in the house. Because it was scary. One minute he was fighting Harry Potter and the next he was jumping out to the screen!

Any other bits you liked?

I liked the bit when Ron smashed the necklace (a horcrux) because it was really cool. It was scary and and came out to the screen. There was nothing I didn’t like! (Pause) Oh, hang on! I didn’t like it when Dobby died as that was sad. And I didn’t like the part where Bellatrix was torturing Hermione.

Who was your favourite character?

I think my favourite character was Dobby as he was funnier than all the others and I thought he was cool because he could teleport.

What do you think will happen in part 2?

I think they are going on a quest to find the hufflepuff cup?

The what?

The hufflepuff cup. You know, the things they have to find.

The horcruxes?

No, the hufflepuff cup!

They are looking for “horcruxes”!

Well you said that they we’re looking for the hufflepuff cup!

Oh sorry, my fault then?

Yep!

Are you looking forward to Part II?

Yes, very much. I think it’s going to be more adventurous and I’m looking forward to seeing how they escape the traps!

Would you recommend the film to your friends?

Probably not.

What? Why not?

Well, all my friends don’t like Harry Potter….they think it’s a bit geeky.

Really? So you wouldn’t tell them to go and see it?

Maybe. I mean, I really liked it, but I just want to fit in…like Meg in Family Guy! (said with irony) But if they liked Harry Potter I’d tell them it’s great!

Can you sum up the film in one word?

I can’t sum it up in one word can i???

Sure you can.

Alright then…supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

Any last thoughts?

The film is number 1!

But you won’t tell your mates?

Nah, I’ll tell them that it was 5 or 6!

Anything else you won’t to say?

I will say I’m proud of my big brother…..and I don’t mean you Dean, ha ha!

Movie Review - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I

As some of you will be aware, i spent well over a year of my life working at Hogwarts and the reward for that was an advanced ticket to the cast and crew screening of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I. Well, i say cast and crew, but i found out last year that it is mainly crew and friends of the crew that go, as the majority of the main cast tend to skip out on this screening and wait for the premiere. Suckers! This screening was a full 5 days before the world premiere so, ha! It made no odds to my little brother mind you, as i managed to convince him that Ron's stand in was actually Rupert Grint himself. So in his eyes, he was mixing with the stars! Right, enough of my babbling, onto the (hopefully, not too biased) review.

As we all know, Harry Potter is a global phenomenon. I have been to several parts of the globe where kids couldn't speak a word of english, but could happily tell you the four houses of Hogwarts! It's amazing. And the buzz of what would and wouldn't be included in the final parts of the franchaise caused intense speculation on the web. Debates had been raging since the films announcement.

In some ways, I feel this buzz and passion transcended onto the set, and you could tell there was definitely an attempt by director David Yates to do the last book justice and keep in mind the story that needed to be told. I mean, it seemed that everyone was well aware that you can have all the effects and action in the world, but if you lose sight of the story, you don't have a film. So how did all this hard work and effort turn out on screen?

In a nut shell, very well. (The following includes minor spoilers so please don't read on if you haven't read the book or are not interested in knowing what happens.) Deathly Hallows part one picks up with a warning that everything has changed. Voldemort's army are attacking both humans and wizards and are slowly taking control. Harry and Hermione have had to pack up their remaining belongings and leave their homes. It is particularly tough for Hermione who has to not only leave her parents, but to also erase herself from their memories and become an orphan herself like Harry. What follows in the next 2 and a half hours could essentially be described as a road movie with magic. Deathly Hallows Part One is the build up to the final showdown between good and evil. The horcruxes introduced inThe Half Blood Prince need to be found, and it is up to our three heroes to find and destroy them. This is no easy task mind you. Voldemorts army are out to find Harry Potter and nobody can be trusted. We watch as they scour the country high and low for clues, constantly putting themselves in danger and ultimately getting caught by Bellatrix's army.

The film definitely lives up to hype and it opens at such a pace that you are hooked from the start. I thought The Half Blood Princelost a little spark and strayed too far from the book, but that isn't the case here. The "seven potters" sequence is truly breathtaking and let's you know that you're not in hogwarts anymore. Within the first 15 minutes, George loses an ear and mad eye moody is killed. The polyjuice sequence in the Ministry of Magic is epic but also provides a few laughs.

At 2 and half hours long, i was never once bored and that is saying something considering that almost everything you have seen before is absent from this film. There is no hogwarts, no quidditch and no kids except for a few brief appearances from our supporting cast. This is all about Harry, Ron and Hermione and there quest for the horcruxes and their persuit to destroy Voldemort.

The acting again betters the previous years efforts as do the special effects. There are some real tense moments the 3 main cast have to deal with, but they did a great job and you really feel for them and i'll admit it, there were a few unexpected emotions flying about at the end. There were some great cameo appearances from the likes of Rhys Ifans who seemed like a top bloke, and Bill Nighy who was one of the nicest people i met on the set. Well, i say met. I think i just stared at him for a few days until he had no option but to say hello!

I did have a few issues with the film however, but these were the same issues i had with the book. I found the middle section seemed to drag on for far too long. This is where the bias of working on the film may come in, as i personally wasn't bored by these sequences as it was a trip down memory lane. But one might find it a little tedious watching 3 kids on the hunt for horcruxes and on the run from you know who. I understand that this was such an important section of the book in terms of storyline, character development and the fact that it sets up a large part of what is to come later on in the story, but if you are not a hardcore fan of the books and maybe only watch the films for the fantasy elements, it may leave you sitting waiting for the next big set piece.

I couldn't recall too many things missing from the book, except for a lack of explanation as to why the kids can be traced so easily. In the book it is because Voldemort can trace a person everytime they say his name, but there is no real reason given as to why they are being found so easily or why this suddenly stops. But they do start using "you know who" instead of Voldemort. Another thing that i found odd, but i believe to be the same as the book, was the lack of love for poor old Mad Eye Moody! There is a very sad moment towards the end of the film when a loveable character dies and you could tell most of the audience were welling up. Even big old Dean here got a bit emotional and had to be strong for his little brother's sake. But when poor Mad Eye Moody kicks it after trying to do everything he can to save Harry, it's like ". . . and we flew away from the deatheaters and they almost caught us but it's ok cos we're back. . . oh yeah, Mad Eye's dead. What's for dinner?". I also got this same vibe in the book.

These are only personal gripes and have more to do with the book than the actual film itself. If the things i didn't like about the film were not included, i'm sure the hardcore fans would have been more than upset because like i said before, you can have all the magic in the world, but without a good story you have no film.

So overall i felt The Deathly Hallows to be a success. It should be every Potter fans dream - It's adventurous, fantastical and is a real spectacle. And on a personal note, i couldn't tell you how proud i was to be associated with it and see my name come up in the closing credits. (About 6 minutes in if anyone stays that long!) The film definitely had a lot of story telling to do, but this sets up the Deathly Hallows Part 2 perfectly. And even though i'm not really a Potter fan, i can't wait to see it. There were some longs days and nights spent filming filming the finale and it's set pieces, and i'm positive it will be the perfect ending for most Potter fans!

"Sorry Dean, but i just don't see the resemblance so i'm afraid you can't be my new stunt double!"

Movie Review - Predators

"And i would have gotten away with it, if it hadn't of been for those pesky kids!!"

Having not been a fan of the original 1987 Predator film set in the deep depths of the jungle, I was reluctant to spend 8 of my unemployed British pounds going to see this updated remake/sequel. I don’t know what it is, but I find the predators very one dimensional and boring. When you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all. It’s not like a slasher film where the killer can mix things up slightly and vary his kills. The Predator = hiding in the jungle and striping up some unlucky sucker! However, with this being a quiet period before the release of some bigger summer blockbusters, I decided to take a punt and indulge in a double bill of Predators and Street Dance. Yes my friends, times are hard.

The plot is very, very simple. 8 people awake in the jungle with no memory of how they got there and no knowledge of each other. All they know is each person is a killer in their own right (Black ops, Mexican mafia, Death Row inmate etc.) It slowly unravels that these killers have not been put in the jungle to hunt and kill, but rather something is hunting them. Yup, those pesky “ugly mutha fuckas!”. What follows is a predictable game of cat and mouse as both sets of killers, human or otherwise, try to figure out how best to destroy the other and survive.

After going into to the film with very low expectations, I have to say that I actually enjoyed it a great deal. From the opening 15 minutes, you get the impression that you are watching a Saw movie set in the jungle…but with Aliens…which instantly adds another dimension to the film. For me, the main reason it worked was down to Adrian Brody. When I first heard he was cast as some kind of action hero, I couldn’t really see it, but it turns out he was great in the part. He was cool, calm and in lesser actor’s shoes, his dialogue certainly would have come across as cheesy and unbelievable, but it worked. The supporting cast also had a big part to play in the success of the film. In particular, Walton Goggins from The Shield provided the comic relief but was never over the top. The Predators looked good as always and provided us with some really gory moments. And I’m sure learning how the Predators hone their skills and getting more of an understanding into their psyche will be a nice touch for hardcore fans of the Predator series. But for me, I much preferred the sequences with the human killers rather than any Predator action.

The film does have some pacing issues towards the end, with a scene designed to explain what is taking place seemingly lasting forever and slows things down a great deal. And even though Predators does at least try to be a little different from its predecessors with it’s premise, it’s also realizes that you can’t veer too much from a winning formula. Because of this some parts of the film, and in particular the finale, feel a little contrived. Some might call it paying homage. But wasn’t Bryan Singers Superman Returns supposed be some kind of homage, and look how that turned out?

However, the few grievances I had are far outweighed by the rest of the film and on the whole, I really enjoyed Predators and it was a hour and a half well spent.

Movie Review - StreetDance

Believe it or not, I had actually been itching to see Street Dance 3D for a while now. Yes, it’s true. Dean Crawford is a fan of generic Dance flicks. West Side Story aside, I used to abhor these types of movies, but I happened to stumble across the first Step Up movie some years back due to the lack of English Language films in South Korea, and came out a converted man. I mean, it wasn’t a particularly great film, but it was a lot of fun with some hilarious scenes to boot (wholly unintentional I’m sure). I also liked You Got Served which had an amazing dance off in the finale, and not to mention Roll Bounce which had a skate off in the end. Basically, anything with an “off” in the end I’m all for. So when I saw there was an English effort being made, I was up for supporting the film and seeing if our British compatriots could ‘Step Up’ to the plate and produce something to rival the Americans.

Before StreetDance actually started, the final preview was for Step Up 3D, which I thought was a little unfair, yet totally apt. I felt it unfair to show what would essentially be a glitzier, bigger budget version of the film we were about to see. Yet apt seeing that StreetDance clearly owes a great debt to the first Step Up. Both films follow a dancer with raw talent, struggling to make ends meet but with aspirations of a bigger and better future. And through a chance meeting, both end up taking part in a prestigious dance school/music college. Of course, at first the two contrasting styles fail to connect, with one side being either too posh or too common for the other. But after time, and several montages later, they both realize that their styles can compliment one another and they finally learn to blend street and ballet for the final performance. But no dance movie would be complete without an outside factor hindering one’s ability to make it to the final showdown. Whether it be the big game in High School Musical or an untimely scheduled audition for the best school in the country (Street Dance/Step Up – delete as appropriate). But never fear, Cinderella shall make it to the ball and the final performance shall be had!

If you take the film for what it is, which is a kids Dance movie, it is a lot of fun and some of the dance routines are pretty impressive. It’s not serious in any way and generally everybody is always happy and smiling, the people wear bright colours and I’m sure they will be BFF’s forever. It’s a feel good film that I’m sure young children who have seen an episode of Britains Got Talent in the last few years will revel in. I refer to BGT of course, due to the inclusion of Dance Acts such as Flawless and Diversity, which were a nice touch, and hopefully give these skillful groups more exposure if the film makes it overseas. Flawless, in particular, have a role as the main “villain” of the piece and their routines do switch flawlessly (no pun intended) from TV to Film. Some of their moves are outstanding and I could easily watch the film again and again. That, as I have mentioned, is if you take the film for what it is.

If you don’t take the film for what it is, however, and decide to judge it on it’s own merits as a piece of cinema, then you would have to say it was once of the most poorly acted and lazily written films you have seen in a long time. I had flashes of Alice In Wonderland all over again, with an incredibly annoying leading lady that if I wasn’t so stubborn…or cheap…I would have left the cinema. To be fair, Nichola Burley doesn’t have much to work with in terms of a script, but there’s just no emotion in her face and her lines are so poorly delivered it’s untrue. The same goes for all the supporting cast. The script reduces them to caricatures of either posh snobs, feisty London rude girls, horny leaches or dancing buffoons. And there is no hint of originality to the story in the slightest. It’s as if it’s straight out of a Step Up “how-to” guide book but the setting has been changed to London and the script has been made less sexy and ballsy to give it a PG rating.

BUT, and I repeat but, that’s if you don’t want to take the film for what it is. I on the other hand do! I am willing to ignore all of the films faults and can safely say that StreetDance is a thoroughly enjoyable film for anyone under the age of 12 (or in my case, 29!) and I am glad that I went to see it and did my part to help support the UK film industry. Now, excuse me while I go and limber up for the nearest Dance Battle I can find.

WHAT, WHAT!!!

Get LOST - The finale pre and post viewing event

I almost cannot believe it. 6 years of our lives have passed and our Lost adventure is almost over. It's been a long, hard, strenuous but ultimately enjoyable experience and one that i am very excited to see how it ends. However, did you notice one word that i didn't use to describe my lost experience? That was fulfilling.

As much as Lost has captivated and excited me, it has disappointed in equal measures. I distinctly remember thinking during Season 2, that if it didn't stop putting out filler episodes that go no where i would stop watching. Luckily the week after was the return of Michael where he shot not only Libby and Ana Lucia, but also himself. BANG! I was back.

Each season seemed to follow this trend of a huge opening followed by several slower (some would argue filler) episodes then a race towards an exciting finale. I had hoped that the final season would have changed this format slightly and packed every single episode with great reveals or exciting plot twists. I expected each flash to relate to on island actions or to tell us more about each character. Instead, we got sequences of Sayid fixing vases, or Jack watching his son playing the piano. With the power of hindsight, how has that helped the show? I wanted more episodes akin to Ben or Locke's flashes, where each scene was a reference to seasons past and had some kind of new reveal or corralation to another character.

In typical Lost fashion, i felt the pacing of the final season was off. There was too much of a void in the middle, but then a sprint towards the end and in doing getting some quick reveals to some extremely important questions. We found out what they whispers were in passing. We know why the island is so special - It is life itself and has to be protected. Wow. Great. Though i would have like more than a few passing lines in the last episode (which, in my opinion, was diabolical!) and explored these further.

We have two episodes left and i can't for the life of me see where they are going with it. I initially thought that the flash sideways were the creation of Fake Locke. I thought that they were his impressions of what he imagined the Losties' perfect lives to be. I thought as the season continued, both timelines would clash, forcing them to choose which timeline they want to stay in. But seeing as Locke definitely wants them dead and no such offer has been made, i have no idea how it will end. If anyone has any thoughts on this, please put them up. We could possibly have a sweep stake where each person makes five or so predictions about how Lost will end and the person who gets the most right wins the stash!

I could go on for hours about what i have like/disliked about the final season (or the show in general for that matter) but this is just the start and i'll open the forum up to the rest of you. No matter what you might think, this is a huge event in television and i wish i could make it to Vics for the showing, but internet chatter will have to suffice. There might only be two episodes left, but the finale will only be the beginning. For every person that is happy with the finale, another will be outraged. I just hope i'm not one of them!

**UPDATED**

Now we are only 24 hours away from finishing our last ever Lost episode. Vicky has arranged what looks like will be an excellent event. Let me know not only your thoughts on the episode, but on the night itself. Hopefully someone did decide to dress up as Hurley!

Movie Review - Kick-Ass

Violence - Check! Sex - Check! Drugs - Check! Foul Language - Check! Burning Buildings and crazy costumes - Check! And this was just my bus journey through East London to the cinema. I was off to see the new Superhero film, Kick-Ass from Producer-cum-Director-cum-moghul-cum-Supermodel's husband-cum-lucky so and so, Matthew Vaughn.

The advertisement campaign for Kick-Ass has been huge. You couldn't walk ten feet without seeing a poster with the green, wet suited avenger staring at you. And after after watching several (extremely violent) trailers, I was excited to catch an early showing of the film and put up an early review. Those plans were almost scuppered however, as I didn't put my serious-film-reviewer-hat on as i accidentally got very, very drunk!

A friend and I had pre-booked tickets to see the film at the Screen on the Green in North London. A lovely little cinema with EXTREMELY comfortable sofas with arm and footrests (well, that is the least you would expect for £12.50 a ticket!) and a little table to place your drinks as there is a fully licensed bar with table service. I had no idea about this and if I did I probably wouldn't have had the 5 pints with dinner as we went through a bottle of red by the time the trailers were over. Let's hope this doesn't hinder my review! From what I remember...

Kick-Ass is the story of Dave Lizewski, an exceptionally normal teenager whose only special power is being invisible to women. Tired of being a nobody and getting pushed around, he decides to create a costume to become a Superhero and fight crime. His alter ego, Kick Ass, fast becomes an internet sensation and pretty soon, other costumed heroes such as Red Mist (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz) come forward to assist Kick-Ass. But when mafia boss Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong) decides to send a message that being a superhero can be bad for your health, our heroes are faced with their biggest challenge yet.

Kick-Ass is the total antithesis of most superheroes movies that has come before it. It's an R-Rated Spider-Man if you will. Dave Lizewski is basically Peter Parker in disguise. He has the same geeky demeanor and is ignored by women. He lives in the same colourful, leafy suburbs of New York and is beset by family tragedy. But where as a film like Spider-Man only alludes to issues of growing up and being a teenager, Kick-Ass slaps you across the face with them with a nunchuck.


Take an early scene in the first Spider-man film for example, where Peter Parker is exploring a new part of himself, shooting that sticky, creamy substance from his wrist in his bedroom. Aunt May is dismayed by the clamour and wonders what is going on behind closed doors in his room. She knows what he is really doing. We all know what he is doing. In Kick-Ass, no subtlety is needed. Dave is a typical teenager and is jerking off to his school teacher before the opening credits are over. When he becomes a superhero, we see him use his superpowers for good by having sex with his new girlfriend in the ally. The best quote from this film that sums up where Kick-Ass sits in the realm of Superhero films is this: "With great power, comes NO responsibility!".

All the characters are foul mouthed and vicious. The only other film i can think of that was similar was the Watchmen, but that was so dark and brooding, more in tone with The Dark Knight. Kick-Ass still looks and feels like a comic book, just with real characters. For example, before the film even begins we see a guy fall to his death trying to be a superhero. But he was not a hero, just mentally insane. It was refreshing to see a film that was fantastical yet set in the real world at the same time.

Aaron Johnson is good as Kick-Ass, as are the rest of the supporting cast, but the real star of the show for me is Chloe Moretz as Hit Girl. She swears like a sailor and and is more clinical with her gun than Dirty Harry. It's unbelievable seeing how sweet she can be in one scene, yet so convincing shooting up a whole gang in the next. Nicolas Cage is surprisingly good as Big Daddy and Red Mist still has a bit of the 'McLovin's about him but is still has some funny lines.


The directing was also quite impressive and Matthew Vaughn has clearly done his homework into the superhero genre. There are also some original moments to the film and the action sequences are exciting and exhilarating. It was good to see some great camera and grip work in the film moving Matthew Vaughn forward visually and stylistically. One scene in the lumber yard is particularly great to look at without compromising the story.

If I had any gripes with the film, it would be that it looked so similar to some other superhero films in tone, and was almost a shot for shot copy of Spider-Man in certain areas. I would guess the film-makers would say that this is the point as it was supposed to be similar yet drastically different at the same time. The film still worked however, and if this was my only complaint I don't think they have anything to worry about.

Kick-Ass is the kind of superhero film that you have always wanted to see. Kick-Ass could be anyone of us as despite being set in a fantasy world of costume avengers, Kick-Ass has no superpowers, no money and no special gadgets. Just a will and a desire to make a difference. I doubt people will try to copy Kick-Ass and try and become a superhero in their own right, but it has certainly given me a few ideas of my own. Not from a need or desire to do good and fight crime, but i might need a costume and some nunchucks just to make it back home through the mean streets of hackney! Wish me luck...

Movie Review - Crazy Heart

Crazy Heart was one of those films I never really had any strong desire to see. But after Jeff Bridges won the Oscar for best actor, it suddenly became a film I felt I had to see, rather than one I wanted to. I mean, come on. . . it's the dude! Gotta show some support.

Crazy Heart tells the story of washed up country and western singer Bad Blake Nelson, who has seen his fame diminish and has now resorted to playing tiny bars and bowling alleys. He is overweight, alcoholic and needs to turn his life around. This opportunity comes when a meeting with a female reporter (Maggie Gyllenhaal) and an offer from his protégé Tommy Sweet, (Colin Farrell) he is faced with a choice to turn his life around or stay and follow his same destructive path.

I have to admit, I quite enjoyed Crazy Heart. It's a nice, touching story and gives us a deep insight into the life of a fading musician and how they can struggle with life after the fame and money have gone.

As you might expect, Jeff Bridges was brilliant as Bad Blake Nelson. He looked the part, and you could really feel Bad Blake's pain as he tried to battle his inner demons and find something to give his life meaning again. Gyllenhaal was good as the single mother but nothing really stood out as a brilliant performance. Certainly not in the same league as some of her fellow nominees, but I thought their dynamic worked really well and she made the mother a really believable character in her own right, rather than turning into some kind of caricature only here to move the story along.

And seeing as the last country and western song I bought was "Achy Breaky Heart" by Billy Ray Cyrus, I wasn't sure how I was going to respond to the music, but I thought it was great. A few of the songs are extremely catchy, annoyingly so. But they are used a great device to provide us with back-story for Bad Blake. Where as in Ray or Walk the Line or Other funny film where they use flash back. Bad Blake doesn't like talking about his life so his songs do it for him.

This brings me onto one of the main problems I had with the film. Mirroring the current state of Bad Blake's life, not a lot really happens. We see him tour, drink, fuck, repeat. I suppose we are supposed to be more concerned with the relationships between the characters and watch and as Bad tries to make something of his life.

Another problem i had was that I didn't find the story original in any way. There are several movies where our hero has had a fall from grace and battles with his demons. The most recent I can think of is The Wrestler. It was practically the same story and in light of Jeff Bridges and Jamie Foxx's Oscar wins, I thought Mickey Rouke was quite hard done by as he was fantastic.

While i really enjoyed Crazy Heart, it didn't leave me with anything the way The Wrestler or Walk the Line did, and i don't feel like I’ll think about it again apart from the songs I can't get out of my head. I’m sure I have missed something here as a lot of professional reviewers have said that Crazy Heart is great. If you think my review of Crazy Heart was unjustified and not very good, just don’t tell my heart. My achey breaky heart. I just don’t think it understand…

Movie Review - The Crazies

During the awards season, one is generally spoiled for choice with quality films at the cinema. I had the choice this particular Sunday of Avatar, Alice in Wonderland, Invictus or Precious. So what did I choose to see? The Crazies directed by Breck Eisner.

I had been excited to see this film since I first saw the trailer, as I actually had no idea what the film was about. It looked like a zombie film but it didn’t appear to have any zombies. It was a thriller but with a creepy edge. It looked like it could have been the film that M. Night Shayamalan’s The Happening should have been.

The film takes place in the Midwestern town of Ogden. A tiny farming community with only 1,200 people where everyone knows everyone and life is good. That is until a few of the towns folk start displaying strange symptoms and start acting a little….well, crazy.

After a military plane is found in the local river, the government is sent in to round everybody up and lock down the town to see who is infected. When the town’s sheriff’s wife is mistakenly diagnosed as a “crazy”, he risks his life to rescue her and to escape to the next big town. This is harder than it seems because not only do they have to evade the crazies, they also have to avoid the army who are taking no prisoners.


I tend to find the main problem with films of this kind is that they take too long to establish characters and plot, and the scare set-pieces are too few and far between. Not so with The Crazies. Events get going in the first five minutes and never lets up. The Crazies is simply one of the best horror films I have seen for a while.

I know this may sound cheesy, but I really was on the edge of my seat the whole time. Like any good horror film, the scares come thick and fast and are really well. One particular scene in a morgue was particularly creepy and will make you think twice before you ever pull the sheets off of somebody again. The camera work is shaky and in your face, but in this instance it fits perfectly as it contrasts the scares brilliantly with the vast landscapes of Iowa during the few quieter moments.



It’s main focus is just to scare the pants off you. There is no needless exposition explaining why people are the way they are. There is no cheese filled dialogue getting in the way of the action. It is a very real story with real character motivations. There are no scenes breaking into labs or discussing cures. There are no plots to take down the government, the characters main focus is simply to survive.

The actors all do there jobs considerably well. Timothy Olyphant does a good job as the sheriff and you and was also impressed with his wife, played by Radha Mitchell, who I usually have no time for. Joe Anderson who plays the Sheriff’s Deputy is also very impressive, especially when you realize that he is English, and you can put this mostly down to the script as we can all relate with our primal survival instincts.

The Crazies is not a perfect film by any strectch of the imagination, and sure there are some things wrong with it. Believe it or not, but I thought there were too many scares. After 2/3 of the film, it became a bit predictable as you knew every time they sat down or relaxed a crazy was going to attack. I’m sure some people won’t be too pleased by the explanation to the virus, or the lack of back-story to our characters, but I believe some of these “weaknesses” are the films strengths.

The Crazies doesn’t break the mould in any way, but mainly solidifies and builds on it. And while it might not be the perfect film and does contain a few flaws, what it does do, it does very well. And that is play to its strengths by keeping you on the edge of your seat until it makes you jump out of it. If you are getting bored of the recent race for Oscar gold or are getting sick of the latest 3D blockbuster, The Crazies is the perfect antidote.

Movie Review - Alice In Wonderland

I recently saw an internet viral film spoofing the works of Tim Burton. In it, “Burton” tells how the studio wants to make a new movie. His employees sit up with excitement and ask will it be something original? “No” Burton retorts. “We’re going to take a creepy old story and make it even creepier…get me Johnny Depp and my wife on the phone!”. “I can’t not do that”, sighs a disgruntled employee.

Rather than being revered and heralded as one of the all time greats, it seems that in recent years Tim Burton has become more of a laughing stock and his visions have fallen below par from his usual high standards. If there was ever a film that Burton was destined to make, it was Alice in Wonderland. With it's alienated main character and surreal world, it seemed like Tim Burton would rise to the top of his game once again.

The film follows Alice 13 years on from her last adventure. And while she has some recollection of those events, she merely dismisses them as dreams and her own sense of fun.

While she is faced with the prospect of marriage, Alice is summoned back to Wonderland as all her old acquaintances such as The Hatter (Johnny Depp) the Tweedles (Matt Lucas) Mouse (Barbara Windsor) and the White Queen (Anne Hathaway) need help defeating the evil Red Queen, played by the brilliant Helena Bonham Carter.

As you would expect, the world of wonderland is vibrantly alive with the amazing visions of Tim Burton. The sets are dark and brooding and the character design is fantastic. The Red Queen is particularly good with her bulbus head and over the top mannerisms.

Some of the animation is excellent too. I thought the motion capture and animation of their mouths was like nothing I had seen before. The way they spoke was so lifelike, it was unreal.

While all this was initially a joy to look at, unfortunately these were the only things to get me excited in a 2-hour-plus film. The rest of it just lacked that certain spark.

Take Johnny Depp's Mad Hatter for example. Whereas most of the characters had some kind of physical manipulation, he was “normal” which simply gave him the appearance of a disheveled circus clown. And his accent ranged from John Leguizamo’s Toulouse-Lautrec in Moulin Rouge and an angry version of his J.M Barrie in Finding Neverland. All things that we have seen and heard him do before. And there in lies the films biggest problem. It feels like we've simply seen…it…all…before.

Johnny Depp is wacky, the trees curl like fingers, the colours are vivid and the music is orchestral, but i never felt fully engaged enough to care. Mia Wasikowska’s Alice is not a particularly likeable character and plays her with no emotion or feeling whatsoever. Maybe she focused so hard on her English accent, she forgot about portraying her emotions. However, like I stated earlier, Bonham-Carter’s Red Queen is excellent and I really enjoyed Hathaway’s White Queen and some of the other supporting cast.

Alice in Wonderland is a dazzling vision from one of the most innovative directors working today. At times it dazzles and wonders, while at others it leaves you feeling deflated, bored and like you're watching a repeat of some of his previous works. You keep waiting for something to invigorate the experience or to be lost in the next big set piece. Before you go to see Wonderland, maybe it is wise to keep in mind that the film is distributed by Disney and is rated PG. So I doubt it will be as dark and as brooding as some Tim Burton fans had hoped. For some, this film might not be Tim Burton enough to satisfy the die-hard fans, but for some relatively unfamiliar with him and the story of Alice, it might be a welcome introduction.

Movie Review - Micmacs

The following was first over on the recently formed film club The Electric Fleapit's website (www.electictricfleapit.wordpress.com), hence the elaborate talk film club and deviation from a full on review. Have a look if you are interested...


Bonjour mes ami and welcome to the first film review from the Electric Fleapit. After great work over the last few weeks by our dear leader, Vicky Fabri, the film club has finally come together. Our choices were put up on the Electric Fleapit website and gradually we all made our voices heard and voted for what our first film viewing would be. With it being Oscar season, there were several quality options for us to choose.

Unfortunately, being the loser that I am, I had seen most of them so it narrowed my choices considerably. However, I hadn’t seen A Single Man and I really wanted to see if the hype surrounding Colin Firth was justified and see what Tom Ford had to offer. A Single Man was leading the vote for a good while, only to be usurped at the last minute by Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s Micmacs. I was a little bit upset about this, as I had heard it wasn’t his best effort. Not to mention the fact that I am incredibly selfish. Much to my dismay, I believe in the democratic system we live in so went along for the jaunt. Even so, the thought of starting up my own film dictatorship did cross my mind. As did the thought of taking inspiration from my own personal favourite dictator, by kidnapping a film director to make a movie for me. Good old Kim Jong Il you commie fool!

Alas, Micmacs it was. 8.30 at the Barbican centre and there was quite a turnout. 14 in fact, so well done all. And in typical English fashion, we were quickly up the bar ordering Malteasers and booze faster than you could say ‘Micmacs à tire-larigot’. With snacks, booze and tickets in hand, we made our way into the theatre.

Now I am all for supporting independent cinemas and film, but I have to admit that I am a sucker for a multiplex. The perfectly positioned seats, the large screens, the surround sound and what not. Heaven. But don’t blame me for this, blame the society we live in, but as I walked into the cinema it instantly struck me as having the appearance of a university lecture hall. I thought the screen was too far away and there were no cup holders. NO FREAKING CUP HOLDERS, I TELL YOU! But once I sat down in those comfy seats and only had to sit through a few minutes of commercials, I was more than happy to be in an independent “fleapit” to enjoy Micmacs.

Prior to coming tonight, I did some research and was intrigued to see the film as it only came about after Jean-Pierre Jeunet abandoned his adaptation of Yann Martel’s Life of Pi due to budgetary conflicts. Jeunet said he needed $85,000,000 to tell the story of a boy in a boat with a tiger. The studio said “non”. Jeunet said “Au revior” and wrote Micmacs instead. Pretty impressive seeing as it has taken me almost 3 weeks to finish two recaps of Lost.

Now first things first, and the answer to the question which we almost went to war over is “non”. Audrey Tautou was NOT in this film! Despite the Tautou argument, the general consenus and scores of the group varied from 6 out of 10 up to 8.5 out of 10. There was a cheeky 7.7 out of 10 from Fabbri thrown in for good measure to give an average score of 7 out of 10. Upon reflection, I feel my own mark of 6.5 out of 10 was unfair, as I thought Micmacs was a delightful little film and it’s occasional brilliance far outweighed whatever initial misgivings I might have had.

For those of you that didn’t see the film, the premise revolves around Bazil who is a victim of two arms companies. One produced a landmine that killed his father, which subsequently sent his mother mad, and the other produced a bullet that has become lodged in his brain 30 years later and could kill him at any moment. This in turn forces him on the streets where he is subsequently “adopted” by a family of weird and wonderful characters who want to help him get his revenge in a series of humorous capers.

Micmacs is at times amazingly inventive and visually quite stunning. Jean-Paul Jeunet has to be one of the most artistically creative directors working today. Even though they may appear simple to construct with minimal camera set-ups, there is nothing simple about the content of his scenes. Whether it be the use of animation to show Bazil’s “random question” technique to stop himself from passing out. Or putting real life thought bubbles into people’s heads, his use of editing and his well thought out compositions make him a standout director, in my opinion.

The acting is also particularly good from the whole cast. Be it a minor comedic cameo from an airport security guard or our hero, Bazil, played by Dany Boon. Boon’s performance is extravagant and has a youthful charm. I couldn’t stop likening his performance to that from the silent movies of old and Charlie Chaplin in particular. However, it is the supporting cast that really steal the show, with the odd-ball characters such as the uptight human cannonball or the contortionist who hides herself in fridges whenever she is scared. My personal favourite is the African poet who has a flair with words in the worst situations. He steals the scene in every one he is in. Not forgetting the man who invents all kind of weird and wonderful contraptions out of junk. One in particular had me laughing out loud, or “LOL’ing” if there are any kids reading. Some of the best characters, however, are the sets. The junkyard where the Micmacs live is so grandiose and contains so many nick-nacks, that you could probably look at it for hours and still find something new.

The initial problems I had with the film were down to pacing and my own expectations. After the first 15-minutes I thought I was going to be watching one of the best films I had seen this year. I could feel all the old magic of Amélie returning. But for all the set pieces and quirky-ness the film inspires, it never really reaches the heights that you would come to expect if you have seen any of Jeunet’s previous work. It just feels flat in places and like it never really gets into gear until the finale. But like I said earlier, despite what I see as weaknesses in the film were more than made up by many of the films moments of ingenuity. And after recent viewings of Precious and Brothers, it was quite refreshing to just see a nice uplifting, genuinely positive film in which the little guys win.

So my fellow fleapitters, I open the forum up to you. Do you agree with anything I have said? Disagree? What were your thoughts on the film? I will leave you with several questions to ponder…

* Did you think the film was a case of style over substance or are his OTT techniques justified by the story?

* Did it have anything serious to say about the buying and selling of arms?

* In what ways was the film like or unlike any of Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s previous films?

* I said that Jeunet is one of the most visionary directors working today, can you think of anyone else that is equal or surpasses him?

* Do you still think that it was Audrey Tautou on the video store? Come on! Really?
Right, until next time, I will bid you adieu. The next Fleapit evening is on March 13^th in Hackney and the theme is ‘Time Travel’. Go to the voting section and vote for your choice of film. So far Dreamcatchers is leading the way and my preferred options of Primer and Donnie Darko and languishing far behind.

Hmmm, I wonder if I still have Kim Jong Il’s number….